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 § 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 2-5, 11, 12 and 17-20 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.
Claims 2-5, 11, 12 and 17-20 refer to a transport container that was never positively claimed and a cushioning sheet only has to be capable of attaching to a transport container. Since the invention is the cushioning sheet, any claims that are for the structure of the transport container have not been examined and only claims directly related to the cushioning sheet have been examined. Claim 13 positively states the transport container so any claims depending from claim 13 have been examined.
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, 6, 8-10 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (U.S. Patent No. 11673709) in view of Bradley (U.S. Patent No. 4988083).
Regarding Claim 1, Turner discloses a cushioning sheet 38 (Figure 1) attachable to a container body of a transport container (capable of being attached), the container body including a facing portion facing in a first direction and a plurality of recesses recessed from the facing portion (Figure 2), the first direction being orthogonal to a bottom of the container body and outward from the container body (Figure 2), the cushioning sheet comprising: a sheet portion 42 (figure 2), the sheet portion including a first surface to face in the first direction and a second surface to face the facing portion to at least partially cover the facing portion (Figure 4); and a protrusion set (Figure 3) protruding from the second surface and including a plurality of protrusions 58 (Figure 3) integral with the sheet portion, the plurality of protrusions being fittable correspondingly into the plurality of recesses (Figure 3). Turner does not disclose the sheet portion comprising an elastomer. However, Bradley teaches an elastomer (Column 1, line 17; Column 4, lines 4-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Turner to include the above, as taught by Bradley, in order to provide a flexible and durable material.
Regarding Claim 6, Turner discloses the sheet portion includes a sheet center portion 42 (Figure 2) and a sheet periphery 52 (figure 2), the plurality of protrusions include a protrusion 58 (figure 3) located along the sheet periphery in the sheet portion (Figure 3), and the protrusion set includes a fourth protrusion in the sheet center portion 58 (Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 8, Turner discloses the sheet portion includes a leading end facing in a transport direction of the transport container (Figure 2), and a width of the leading end orthogonal to the transport direction is shorter than a maximum width of the sheet portion (Figure 3).
Regarding Claims 9 and 10, Bradley teaches the elastomer has a Shore hardness of 50A or greater and the elastomer is urethane rubber (Column 1, line 17, Column 4, lines 4-5).
Regarding Claim 13, Turner discloses a transport container 5 (Figure 1) transportable on a conveyor including a plurality of rollers arranged in a transport direction (capable of being transported), the transport container being in contact with the plurality of rollers during transportation on the conveyor (capable of being transported on rollers), the transport container comprising: a container body 8 (figure 1), the container body including a facing portion to face a transport surface of the conveyor 20 (figure 1), and a plurality of recesses recessed from the facing portion (figure 2); and the cushioning sheet 38 (Figure 1) according to claim 1, the cushioning sheet being attachable to the container body (figure 4).
Regarding Claim 14, Turner discloses the transport container includes a plurality of the cushioning sheets 38 (figure 1), the facing portion has a plurality of corners corresponding to the plurality of cushioning sheets (Figure 4), each of the plurality of cushioning sheets includes the sheet portion having a length and a width less than 50% of a length and a width of the facing portion (figure 4), and the plurality of cushioning sheets are attached to overlap the plurality of corners of the facing portion (Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 15, Turner discloses the cushioning sheet is attached with the sheet portion at least partially overlapping a center portion of the facing portion in a plan view (figure 1).
Regarding Claim 16, Turner discloses the container body includes a bottom (Figure 2), a plurality of side walls 20 (figure 1) surrounding the bottom and extending from the bottom in a direction opposite to the transport surface (Figure 1), and an opening surrounded by ends of the plurality of side walls opposite to the bottom (Figure 1), the facing portion protrudes from the bottom in a direction opposite to the plurality of side walls and is located inside the opening in a plan view (Figure 2), and the cushioning sheet is attached without protruding from the facing portion in a plan view (Figure 4).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (U.S. Patent No. 11673709) in view of Bradley (U.S. Patent No. 4988083) and Harris (U.S. Patent No. 3648849).
Regarding Claim 7, Turner and Bradley teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for an adhesive member including a first adhesive surface attachable to the sheet portion and a second adhesive surface attachable to the container body. However, Harris teaches an adhesive member (Column 1, lines 51-55). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Turner and Bradley to include the above, as taught by Harris, in order to prevent accidental removal from the shipping container.
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm 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 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.
/ELIZABETH J VOLZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights