DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed 11 May 2026. Claims 1
and 3-10 are now pending. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1,
3-6 and 8-10, as well as the cancellation of claim 2.
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 .
Claim Objections
3. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: at line 8, “defined” should apparently read --defines--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 and 3-10 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.
6. Claim 1 at lines 20-22 recites “…and a movable space is arranged between each of the two positioning channels and a corresponding group of positioning rods…”. This recitation is indefinite as it appears, in light of the specification, that the movable space is defined by the positioning channels (as shown in Fig. 4), and therefore not arranged between each of the two positioning channels and a group of positioning rods, as claimed. Clarification is required.
7. Claim 5 at lines 2-4 recites “a transverse-circular-square structure” and “a longitudinal-circular-square structure”. It is unclear how to interpret a structure which is “transverse-circular-square” or “longitudinal-circular-square”.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 1 and 3-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the objection to the Drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the Replacement Drawings.
10. Applicant’s arguments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the rejection to claims 1-10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered, however new grounds of rejection are presented above to claim 1 in light of the amendments. One of the previous rejections to claim 5 has been maintained as not resolved (or addressed) by amendment.
11. Applicant’s arguments filed 11 May 2026 with respect to the rejection to claims 1 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 citing Nan in view of Leonard have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE HOPKINS MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)272-9058. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30 am - 4:00 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, Charles A Marmor, II can be reached at (571) 272-4730. 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.
/CHRISTINE H MATTHEWS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights