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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 recited “spoke” must be clearly labeled with clear number label. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities because they do not include the following reference sign(s) recited in the claim: The claim recites “spoke”, but the disclosure for the “spoke” is not explicitly presented with clear label.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) The “configured to coupled to a rotatable shaft” of Claim 1 should be:
“configured to be coupled to a rotatable shaft”.
(2) The “the arm that the end retainer is coupled” of Claim 6 would have a better form if amended to be:
“the arm coupled to the corresponding end retainer”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) Claim 1 recites “the first spoke positioned on top of the first arm”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of “the first spoke positioned on the top of the first arm”.
(2) The “wherein each substrate support of the plurality of substrate supports is removably coupled to a different arm of the plurality of arms” of Claim 1 is not clear.
First, does the “different arm” is different from the earlier cited “first arm”?
Further, the “different arm” is considered being the broad recitation, and the “first arm” is considered being the narrower recitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
Second, does the “removably coupled to a different arm” mean the position of the support is continuously changed?
If the applicants intend to mean “each support is coupled to each arm”, it is respectfully requested to appropriately amend it, such as:
“wherein each substrate support of the plurality of substrate supports is removably coupled to each of the plurality of arms”.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined accordingly.
(3) The “an arm of the plurality of arms” of Claim 3 is not clear because of the same reason discussed in the “First” of the item (2) above.
(4) The “each end retainer of the plurality of end retainers is removably coupled to a different arm of the plurality of arms” of Claim 4 is not clear because of the same reasons discussed in the item (2) above.
(5) The “a first surface extending parallel to the central axis” of Claim 5 is not clear. Does the claim define a surface of the central axis? Where?
Because the central axis can have different directional surface, it is not clear how the surface is parallel to the whole body of the central axis.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of “a first surface extending parallel to a surface of the central axis facing the first surface” or “a first surface extending parallel to a longitudinal direction of the central axis”.
(6) The “a second surface inclined with the first surface” of Claim 5 is not clear, because of the mere “with”.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of “a second surface inclined in respect to the first surface”.
(7) The “a top surface of the first arm” of Claim 7 is not clear.
Claim 7 is dependent from Claim 1. Claim 1 recites “top of the first arm”.
It is not clear what structural difference is required between the “top of the first arm” and “a top surface of the first arm”.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of either one.
(4) The “each substrate support of the plurality of substrate supports is removably coupled to a different arm of the plurality of arms” and “each end retainer of the plurality of end retainers is removably coupled to a different arm of the plurality of arms” of Claim 11 is not clear because of the same reasons discussed in the “Second” of the item (2) above.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of:
“each substrate support of the plurality of substrate supports is removably coupled to each of the plurality of arms” and “each end retainer of the plurality of end retainers is removably coupled to each of the plurality of arms”.
(5) The “an arm of the plurality of arms” of Claim 13 is not clear because of the same reason discussed in the “First” of the item (2) above.
(6) The “ESD compliant material” of Claim 20 is not clear, because it is not clear what the “ESD” means.
For the purpose of examination, it will be examined inclusive of:
“electrostatic discharge (ESD) compliant materials”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3-4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
(1) The “arm” of Claims 3-4 and 13 fails to further limit the claim 1 limitations, because of the same reason as discussed in the “First” of the item (2) above. Rather it broadens the scope of claims.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
When all the 112 issues above are resolved, the claims would be allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm PT.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718