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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-20, 22-23, and 27-31 are pending in this application. In the amendment filed July 7, 2025, Claims 5, 7, 13, and 28 have been amended; Claims 10, 17-20 and 22-23 have been withdrawn; and claims 6, 8, 21, and 24-26 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-5, 7, 9, 11-16, and 27-31 are presented for examination on the merits.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed 7/7/2025 have been fully considered and have obviated the objections and rejections set forth in the office action mailed 1/14/2025. Therefore, the objections and rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration there are new grounds of objections and rejections, as noted below.
Examiner Note
The examiner has provided objections and rejections to withdrawn claims in order to help further expedited prosecution, as applicant specifically requested rejoined of the claims in the response filed 7/7/2025 and these claims would be subject to the objections and rejections noted below if the examiner were to rejoin the claims.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
Correction of the following is required: the specification lacks antecedent basis support for the terminology “envelope region“ as claimed in claims 1, 13, 16, and 17 (Withdrawn). There is support for the term “turnover region” for “U” and applicant is respectfully requested to be consistent in their terminology. Moreover, the specification lacks antecedent basis for the term “untying” as claimed in claim17 (Withdrawn). There is support for the term “releasing” on page 9, lines 19-20 and applicant is respectfully requested to be consistent in their terminology.
The specification also lacks support for the claimed ranges of claims 14, 15, and 31.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 17 (Withdrawn), 18 (Withdrawn), 22 (Withdrawn), and 23 (Withdrawn) are objected to because they have multiple periods. Each claim must begin with a capital letter and end with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See: Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995). See: MPEP 608.01(m). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 (Withdrawn) is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits.
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 1-5, 7, 9, 10 (Withdrawn), 11-16, 17-20 (Withdrawn) & 22-23 (Withdrawn), and 27-31 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.
Applicant claims an “envelope region” in claims 1, 13, 16, 17 (Withdrawn) and it is unclear what constitutes an envelope region, as the specification lacks support for the term “envelope region”. However, the specification provides support for a “turnover region” and it is unclear if these terms are being used interchangeably. Applicant is respectfully requested to be consistent in their terminology, as the specification should provide antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter.
Claim 23 (Withdrawn) describes “the device for knotting two thread ends according to claim 1”. However, claim 1 only knots one thread end where that one thread end has two thread sections. Thus the metes and bounds of claim 23 are unclear.
Any remaining claims are rejected as depending from a rejected base claim.
Conclusion
Claim 1-5, 7, 9, 11-16, and 27-31 are free of art rejections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLINTON T OSTRUP whose telephone number is (571)272-5559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Edward Lefkowitz can be reached at 571-272-2180. 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.
/CLINTON T OSTRUP/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3732