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 .
An examination of this application reveals that applicant is unfamiliar with patent prosecution procedure. While an applicant may prosecute the application (except that a juristic entity must be represented by a patent practitioner, 37 CFR 1.31), lack of skill in this field usually acts as a liability in affording the maximum protection for the invention disclosed. Applicant is advised to secure the services of a registered patent attorney or agent to prosecute the application, since the value of a patent is largely dependent upon skilled preparation and prosecution. The Office cannot aid in selecting an attorney or agent.
A listing of registered patent attorneys and agents is available at https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/. Applicants may also obtain a list of registered patent attorneys and agents located in their area by writing to the Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the provided Fig. 9 shows an arrow or a line, but it fails to show “the reference number.” Moreover, the provided Fig. 1 show as “a top view” and Figs. 3 and 5 disclose as “a side view.” It appears in Figs. 3 and 5 that the display of forks or tines as to whether the disclosure provide at least two or four forks or tines. Clarification must be made. 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.
Specification
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A COMPACT DISC OR AS A TEXT FILE VIA THE OFFICE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM (EFS-WEB): The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.52(e) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for EFS-Web posted on the USPTO website (www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/legal-framework-efs-web-06april11) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i)-(p).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72(b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821-1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421-2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-3 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Claim 1 recites “The skewer spline tooth would fit the design of the handle shaft barrel, once inserted with a turn of the handle and pull; the spline tooth shaft would interlock with the skewer barrel, to prevent the handle from being removed without first returning the shaft to the release position.”
The recitation of claim 1 is confusing and not clearly understood as to whether applicant is reciting an apparatus claim or a method of making a skewer. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified.
Moreover, there is no antecedent basis for “the skewer” (line 1), “the design” (line 1), “the handle shaft barrel,” “the spline.”
Claim 2 also recites “The handle would be formed in a manner to accept an attachable container and the detached skewers encompassing the handle shaft for organized storage.” Similarly, the recitation of claim 2 is confusing and not clearly understood as to whether applicant is reciting an apparatus claim or a method of making a skewer. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified.
The exact meaning of the recitation of “The skewer cooking end would be available in multiple lengths to suit the cooking method and dimensions which may include indoor/outdoor grilling,” as recited in Claim 3 is also confusing and not clearly understood. The phrase “multiple lengths to suit the cooking method and dimensions” is vague and indefinite as to the claim language such as “multiple lengths to suit the cooking method,” or “multiple lengths to suit …………. and dimensions.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Conigliaro (D479,444) (see PTO-892).
RE claim 1, Conigliaro (D479,444) discloses a barbeque skewer (see Figs. 1-4) comprising: a spline tooth (see Exhibit A), a handle shaft barrel having a keyway, when inserted with a turn of the handle and pull; the spline tooth interlocks with the skewer barrel, to prevent the handle from being removed without first returning the shaft to a release position.
Exhibit A
[AltContent: textbox (Shaft barrel )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fork or tines)][AltContent: textbox (Tooth or teeth)][AltContent: textbox (handle)][AltContent: textbox (keyway)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
RE claim 3, Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444) appears to be suitable to use for an indoor or outdoor grilling or smokers.
Claim(s) 1-3, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ekberg (,7735,416) (see PTO-892).
RE claim 1, Ekberg (,7735,416) discloses a barbeque skewer (see Figs. 1-11) comprising: a spline tooth (92) (see Exhibit B), a handle shaft barrel (14) (see Fig. 2) having a keyway (13) (Fig. 2), wherein the spline tooth interlocks with the skewer barrel, to prevent the handle from being removed without first returning the shaft to a release position. Exhibit B
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
RE claim 2, , Fig. 5A of Ekberg’s skewer (7,735,416) teaches an attachable container to contain a handle shaft or tools (see Fig. 2) for organized storage.
RE claim 3, Figs. 2, 7, and 8 of Ekberg’s skewer (7,735,416) to be suitable to use for an indoor or outdoor grilling or smokers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 2, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444) in view of Ekberg (7,735,416).
Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444), as presented above, does not specifically show an attachable container encompassing the handle shaft for organized storage. However, Fig. 5A of Ekberg (7,735,416) teaches an attachable container to contain a handle shaft or tools (see Fig. 2) for organized storage. Thus, it would have been obvious to those skilled in the mechanical art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an attachable container on the Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444) as taught by (7,735,416) so that a user can uses the container as a storage and also to prevent the skewer from being damaged.
Claim 3, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444).
If Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444), as presented above, does not specifically show the structural dimension of multiple lengths, it is pointed to those skilled in the mechanical art to before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the preferred dimension on the Conigliaro’s barbeque skewer (D479,444) to be used at various applications.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL T CHIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6922. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-4:30 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, Gene Crawford can be reached on (571) 272-6911. 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.
/PAUL T CHIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651