DETAILED ACTION 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. Response to Arguments Upon review of Applicant's amendments filed on December 5 , 202 5 , the rejections set forth in the Office Action mailed on September 5 , 202 5 have been withdrawn. However, these amendments introduced new 35 U.S.C. 112 issues, please see below for current rejections. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1-9 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. Claim 1 recites: “ A brake device for a realization of laminar packages for electrical use defined by an overlapping of magnetic laminations formed by shearing, wherein : the brake device is coupled to a shearing apparatus and positioned below a shearing mould ; said brake device comprise a brake block provided with an opening formed according to an axial direction of movement of a shearing element of the shearing apparatus and with a shape corresponding to that of a lamination sheared by said shearing element; said brake device has a size smaller than a size of the shearing mould that forms the lamination to define an interference functional to a packing of the laminations; and the brake device comprises mechanical stress compensation means adapted to keep said interference constant, wherein said mechanical stress compensation means comprise pockets formed outside the opening of the brake block and extended in a thickness of the axial direction of said brake block and along the peripheral edge of the opening .” It is not clear what elements are required by the claim – is the shearing apparatus required? Applicant’s remarks filed on December 5, 2025 suggest that it is a required element; however, the preamble only set forth “A brake device.” The shearing apparatus is not a part of the brake device it is something it is “coupled to.” The rest of the claim appears to set forth a system that includes a brake device AND a shearing mould. For purposes of examination, it is understood that the claim is a system comprising a brake device and a shearing mould. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9 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. 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 FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TERESA M EKIERT whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1901 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30PM 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Christopher Templeton can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-1477 . 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. /TERESA M EKIERT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725