DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouc (US6,244,459).
1. A molded bottle (Fig 1) for an intermediate bulk container system, the
molded bottle comprising: a bottom wall (base of the bottle); a top wall (uppermost wall) opposite the bottom wall, and a central axis (through middle of the container) extending through the bottom and top walls; a plurality of columns (86) extending vertically from the bottom wall, the plurality of columns defining a column thickness; a plurality of sidewalls (4 walls, entire side upstanding walls) extending vertically between the bottom wall and the top wall and horizontally between the plurality of columns; and a plurality of ribs (90), each of the plurality of ribs protruding from one of the plurality of sidewalls (Fig. 1) away from the axis and extending between a pair of the plurality of columns. Bouc DIFFERS in that it does not disclose each of the plurality of ribs defines a rib thickness that is less than or equal to the column thickness. However a change is size or shape is within the level of one of ordinary skill within the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill within the art to modify Bouc by employing each of the plurality of ribs defines a rib thickness that is less than or equal to the column thickness, in order to have the desired structural rigidity of the container.
2. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of
sidewalls defines a sidewall thickness that is less than the column thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
3. The molded bottle of claim 2, wherein the column thickness is at least
15 percent greater than the rib thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
4. The molded bottle of claim 2, wherein the column thickness is greater than a material thickness of the bottom wall, and wherein the column
thickness is greater than a material thickness of the top wall (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
5. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of
sidewalls defines a sidewall thickness that is greater than the rib thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
6. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sidewalls each
define a sidewall thickness that is less than the column thickness and greater than the rib thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
7. The molded bottle of claim 6, wherein the sidewall thickness is at
least 20 percent greater than the rib thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
8. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of columns
defines a first height, and each of the plurality of sidewalls having a top
surface and a second height defined between the bottom wall and the top
surface, wherein the first height is greater than the second height (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
9. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein the rib thickness is greater
than a material thickness of the bottom wall, and wherein the rib thickness
is greater than a material thickness of the top wall (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
10. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein the plurality of ribs extend
horizontally and substantially perpendicular to the axis (Fig. 1).
11. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sidewalls define
an ovoid structure, and wherein the plurality of ribs form a band arranged
around the perimeter of the ovoid structure (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
12. The molded bottle of claim 1, wherein the rib thickness is less than
the column thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
13. A molded bottle (Fig 1) for an intermediate bulk container system, the
molded bottle comprising: a bottom wall (base of the bottle); a top wall (uppermost wall) opposite the bottom wall, and a central axis (through middle of the container) extending through the bottom and top walls; a plurality of columns (86) extending vertically from the bottom wall, the plurality of columns defining a column thickness; a plurality of sidewalls (4 walls, entire side upstanding walls) extending vertically between the bottom wall and the top wall and horizontally between the plurality of columns; and a plurality of ribs (90), each of the plurality of ribs protruding from one of the plurality of sidewalls (Fig. 1) away from the axis and extending between a pair of the plurality of columns. Bouc DIFFERS in that it does not disclose wherein each of the plurality of ribs defines a rib thickness that is less than the column thickness, wherein each of the plurality of sidewalls defines a sidewall thickness that is less than the column thickness and greater than the rib thickness. However a change is size or shape is within the level of one of ordinary skill within the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill within the art to modify Bouc by employing wherein each of the plurality of ribs defines a rib thickness that is less than the column thickness, wherein each of the plurality of sidewalls defines a sidewall thickness that is less than the column thickness and greater than the rib thickness.
14. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein the column thickness is
greater than a material thickness of the bottom wall, and wherein the
column thickness is greater than a material thickness of the top wall (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
15. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of
columns defines a first height, and each of the plurality of sidewalls having
a top surface and a second height defined between the bottom wall and the
top surface, wherein the first height is greater than the second height (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
16. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein the rib thickness is less than
a material thickness of the bottom wall, and wherein the rib thickness is
less than a material thickness of the top wall (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
17. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein the plurality of ribs extend horizontally and substantially perpendicular to the plurality of columns (Fig. 1).
18. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein the plurality of sidewalls define an ovoid structure, and wherein the plurality of ribs form a band arranged around the perimeter of the ovoid structure (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
19. The molded bottle of claim 13, wherein the sidewall thickness is about
20% greater than the rib thickness (this occurs when the reference has been modified).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 20, lines 13-24 are not obvious together in its entirety, in light of the other claim limitations of claim 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREEN KAY THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5611. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/KAREEN K THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights