DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 28, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 (line 11) “locking elements projects” should recite –locking elements project--.
In claim 1 (line 17) “second position: ” should recite –second position; --.
For the purpose of examining the application, it is assumed that such corrections have been made.
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 1-9 and 11-17 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 (lines 7-8) recites “a first spring biasing the shuttle for movement away from a base of the well when the lug is inserted into the well”.
Claim 1 fails to recite any limitations which allow one to properly determine what other structural component of the coupling mechanism the first spring engages in order to “bias the shuttle for movement away from a base of the well when the lug is inserted into the well”. It is unclear as to what other structural element the first spring abuts in order to transmit a resilient biasing force to the shuttle; a spring clearly must engage two opposing members in order to transmit a biasing force to one of the members. Accordingly, one is unable to properly determine the metes and bounds of such claim. Claims 2-9 and 11-17 depend from claim 1 and are likewise rejected as being indefinite.
Examiner notes that inclusion of the limitations of claim 5 in claim 1 would overcome such 35 USC 112 rejection.
Claims 1-9 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships which render the claims indefinite are as follows:
Claim 1 (lines 15-23) recites “a stop being movable within the lug between a first position and a second position… wherein in the first position the biased movement of the shuttle along the insertion axis is blocked by the movable stop… and wherein in the second position the biased movement of the shuttle along the insertion axis opposite the insertion direction causes the locking elements to interact with a second surface profile of the shuttle”.
Claim 1 fails to recite any limitations which allow one to properly determine how the stop structurally engages the shuttle in order to provide for or prevent biased movement of the shuttle via the first spring as a result of movement of the stop between the first and second positions within the lug. It is unclear as to how movement of the stop within the lug directly allows for or directly prevents the movement of the shuttle via the first spring; it is unclear as to what structural components of the coupling mechanism actuate or facilitate movement of the shuttle due to the movement of the stop within the lug between the first and second positions. Accordingly, one is unable to properly determine the metes and bounds of such claim. Claims 2-9 and 11-17 depend from claim 1 and are likewise rejected as being indefinite.
Examiner notes that inclusion of the limitations of claims 5 and 6 in claim 1 would overcome such 35 USC 112 rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 and 11-17 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 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, Anna Momper can be reached on (571)270-5788. 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.
05/21/26
/MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights