Envelopes – wrappers – and paperboard boxes – File folder or file envelope
Reexamination Certificate
2001-03-28
2003-12-09
Pascua, Jes F. (Department: 3727)
Envelopes, wrappers, and paperboard boxes
File folder or file envelope
C229S067400, C206S425000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06659336
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF INVENTION
It is not uncommon to see on a desktop multiple individual documents, such as letters, contracts, reports, articles, etc. shingled or stair-stepped (shingling) in such a way that one document horizontally overlays then next with a small offset so as to expose only the top part of each document. This traditional practice is sometimes known as shingling and requires nothing to accomplish, other than a relatively flat surface and the presence of relatively flat objects to be shingled.
Shingling has the advantage of allowing the user to hold many more documents on the desktop than would be possible if the documents were laid end to end, and shingling has the advantage over evenly stacked documents, as shingling allows for the quick recognition and selection of a desired document.
This Inventor was one of those business people who frequently horizontally shingled documents on his desk. However, he was consistently frustrated with some of the major limitations inherent in shingling, specifically:
1.) How quickly the shingled pile seemed to get out of order or out of the original evenly spaced shingled format when documents were selected and removed from the shingled pile. This fact, resulted in the expenditure of time and effort to maintain the original shingled format, and;
2.) The difficulty in transporting a shingled pile, resulting in the necessity to contract the shingled pile before transporting and then re-extend the documents back into a shingled form after transportation, again taking much time and energy to recreate the shingled format.
This Inventor set out in search of a container that would solve the above two limitations. Having searched multiple office supply sources, with no solution found, the inventor turned to the patent office to see if anyone had ever developed a container to improve the handling of horizontally shingled documents.
Again, no solution was found. Although the patent office showed several types of extending filing systems, none of them were designed, nor met the needs for handling and transporting horizontally shingled documents commonly found on desktops.
To be successful in the handling and transporting of horizontally shingled documents, several goals would need to be met, and several prior art limitations and disadvantages would need to be overcome.
THE PRIOR ART
No other prior art reviewed incorporates all of the features and benefits of the present invention. Also, the prior art contains limitations and disadvantages that are overcome by the present invention, some examples of the prior arts limitations and disadvantages include:
a. Sealed receptacle sides
b. Protrusions or holes on the facing walls of a receptacle
c. Document contact with a sliding panel or the sliding mechanism
d. Requirement of a separate rigid casing or fixed sized cover
e. Lack of a securing device
f. Securing device is not easily adjustable to a wide variety of thicknesses
g. Cost is higher, resulting from the number of parts, material type and fabrication cost.
In sum, none of the prior art descriptions state that they were invented for the purpose of improving the handling, transportation and re-shingling of horizontally shingled documents commonly found on desktops; in fact, the majority refer to either vertical operation and/or a hanging orientation of the inventions.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,706,396 Nomura
a. Nomura describes a bag with three sealed sides, as opposed to present invention's one closed side.
b. Given the fixed length of the wrap around cover, the number of bags is restricted to that which can be enclosed within the fixed length cover. Conversely, present invention uses separate back and front covers to allow for a wide range of thicknesses.
c. Nomura's outer cover requires full opening, and thus a preset amount of space before bags can commence sliding.
d. Nomura requires the addition of a third connecting element for the purpose of attaching one bag to another. Present invention requires no such third element, significantly reducing material and manufacturing cost.
e. As a bag becomes full, insertion and extraction of additional objects becomes increasing difficult and eventually insertion is restricted by the maximum capacity of the bag. Present invention has no sides, thus allowing a much greater range of capacity.
f. Bags are physically connected, thus separation of bags and/or reorganization is not possible. Present invention allows the user to reorganize, add or subtract receptacles.
g. Nomura describes the requirement of plastic material to create the invention. Present invention has no such limitation of material type and thus allows for flexibility to use materials of less cost.
h. Nomura's requires the front and back bags to be attached to the cover. Present invention integrates functional receptacles into both the back and front panels of the cover.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,871,066 LaWall
a. LaWall also describes a pocket with three sealed sides.
b. LaWall describes the preferred embodiment as a vertical operation not horizontal.
c. LaWall's individual pockets show no protection from reverse force movement that would result in his invention's unintentional disposition or disassembly.
d. As a pocket becomes full, insertion and extraction of additional objects becomes increasing difficult and eventually restricted to the maximum width of the pocket.
e. Attempted horizontal usage would cause an angled disposition of each of the pockets, placing excessive stress on the telescoping mechanism resulting in difficulty when attempting to return the invention to registry.
f. Finally, attempted horizontal usage would cause the envelopes to come in contact with the enclosed documents during the telescoping process, resulting in friction on the enclosed documents that would result in movement of the documents and the loss of the desired evenly shingled format.
U.S. Pat. No. 44,444,314 Jacobsson
a. Jacobsson describes the need for an outer box like case to contain the pocket like receptacles. An outer box like case is more expensive in terms of both the type of material required and the additional manufacturing process. Also, a fixed size case limits the total capacity to the width of the case.
b. Jacobsson describes the design of the folders' movement in terms of vertical operation, not horizontally.
c. Jacobsson requires additional intermediate coupling and sliding members, and an inner cover enclosing, thus increasing the material and manufacturing costs.
d. The internal walls of Jacobsson's pockets contain both protrusions and openings that would inhibit the smooth slide of a document during insertion, if horizontal operation was attempted.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,589,544 Schweinsberg
a. Schweinsberg describes a pocket with three sealed sides.
b. The invention has no housing or cover wrap that would allow the unit to easily protect any exposed objects during transportation.
c. The lack of a cover wrap also allows contained objects to slide out during transportation, thus severely limiting the suitability of using the invention for the transportation of contained objects.
d. Further, the lack of a cover wrap allows for the potential of unintentional displacement of the folders while in transportation.
e. Single internally centered tongues and tapered flaps result in poor lateral stability, i.e. the ease of keeping alignment with the proceeding folder becomes increasing difficult as folders are added.
f. The openings, created by the tongues, in the folders' walls and the tabs on the tongues are likely to catch or snag a document as it is inserted into a folder.
g. As a pocket becomes full, insertion and extraction of additional objects becomes increasing difficult and eventually insertion is restricted by the maximum capacity of the pocket.
h. Schweinsberg describes the invention in terms of vertical operation and/or an accordion type of movement, not horizontal. Attempted horizontal usage would cause parts of the pockets to come in contact with the enclosed objects during the displacement process, resulting in f
LandOfFree
Horizontal container for the handling of flat objects does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Horizontal container for the handling of flat objects, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Horizontal container for the handling of flat objects will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3173329