FINAL REJECTION
Examiner’s Remarks
With respect to amendment filed 4/10/2026:
The amendment to claim 20 is acknowledged and accepted.
The cancelation of claims 1-19 and 21 is acknowledged and accepted.
The addition of new claims 22-34 is acknowledged and accepted.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/21/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-final office action on 12/17/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “entire surface of the enclosing member is covered by the body member” in a same embodiment as the tag being sandwiched between the first convex portion and the second convex portion must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (claim 20). Additionally, the manner in which the first part and the second part are connected, e.g. press-fitted, hinge, with respect to the claimed embodiment must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (claims 26, 27, 30). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 20 and 22-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites “an entire surface of the enclosing member is covered by the body member or by the body member and the decal member”. Figs. 8 and 9 illustrates an entire surface of the enclosing member (12 / 121”, 122”) is covered by the body member (11’) ([0082], [0084]), which is a fourth embodiment. Figs. 11-14 are drawn to a fifth embodiment where the RFID tag is sandwiched between the first convex portion and the second convex portion of the enclosing member, where “an entire surface of the enclosing member is covered by the body member and the decal member” ([0089], Fig. 14). The specification does not describe an embodiment of the RFID tag is sandwiched between the first convex portion and the second convex portion of the enclosing member, where an entire surface of the enclosing member is covered by the body member. As such, “an entire surface of the enclosing member is covered by the body member” is considered new matter with respect to the claimed fifth embodiment of the RFID tag is sandwiched between the first convex portion and the second convex portion of the enclosing member.
Regarding claims 26, 27 and 30, para. [0079] recites “The first part 121 and the second part 122 may be connected to each other in a hinged manner. In this case, too, the first part 121 and the second part 122 can be assembled to each other with the RFID tag 14 contained in the sealed space by press-fitting or engaging the first part 121 and the second part 122 by placing the RFID tag 14 between them with the first part 121 and the second part 122 connected.”. However this description is with respect to a different embodiment than that claimed. More specifically, the is description is with respect to Fig. 6 (second embodiment). The currently claimed fifth embodiment only describes “The enclosing member 120 comprises a first part 1201 and a second part 1202 glued together.” ([0085]). As such, the limitations of claims 26, 27 and 30 are considered new matter with respect to the claimed embodiment.
Claims not specifically addressed fail to comply with the written description requirement due to their dependency.
Examiner’s Remarks
With respect to claim(s) 20 and 22-34, the examiner makes no prior art rejection. However, these claims are not allowable pursuant to the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, rejection.
With respect to claim 20, based on the following interpretation, prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest, either singly or in combination, an entire surface of the enclosing body is covered by the body member and the decal member, the first part of the enclosing member includes a first convex portion, the second part of the enclosing member includes a second convex portion, and a portion of the RFID tag is sandwiched between the first convex portion and the second convex portion, in addition to the other limitations of the claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 20 and 22-34 have been considered but are moot in view of the amendments to claim 20 and newly added claims 22-34.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Telephone/Fax Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUEZU ELLIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 6:30 pm 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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571) 272-3689. 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.
/SUEZU ELLIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights