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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4, 8, and 10 have been amended; Claims 21-54 are previous withdrawn from consideration as non-elected claims, Claims 1-20 remain for examination, wherein claim 1 is an independent claim.
Previous Rejections/Objections
Previous objection of Claims 4, 8, and 10 because informalities is withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s “Arguments/Remarks with amendment” filed on 11/14/2025.
In view of the Applicant’s “Arguments/Remarks with amendment” filed on 11/14/2025, and reconsiderations, a new ground rejection has listed as following:
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuhashi et al (US-PG-pub 2014/0023432 A1, listed in IDS filed on 8/29/2022, thereafter PG’432).
PG’432 is applied to the instant claims 1 and 5-6 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 8/19/2025.
Regarding the amended features in the instant claim 1, as shown in the Fig. 2 and partially enlarged of the Fig.2 of PG’432 as shown in the following. PG’432 provides examples having crevice greater than 40mm (Samples #1, #23 of table 1 of PG’432) and LC < LB (C point is between B point and deepest crevice as shown in the enlarged Fig.2(b) of PG’432).
PNG
media_image1.png
360
568
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PG’432 in view of TSUGE SHINJI et al (JP 2018028146 A, listed in IDS filed on 4/9/2024, with on-line translation, thereafter JP’146).
PG’432 in view of JP’146 is applied to the instant claims 2-4 and 7-20 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 8/19/2025.
Regarding the amended features in the instant claims 4, 8, and 10, they are not change the claimed scopes.
Notes: Adachi et al (US-PG-pub 2010/0084413 A1) is recorded as a reference only.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments to the art rejection to Claims 1-20 have been considered but they are moot in view of the new ground rejection as stated as above. Regarding the arguments related to the amended features, the Examiner’s position is stated as above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIE YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1884. The examiner can normally be reached on IFP.
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, Jonathan J Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JIE YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights