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
Claims 1-9, 13--33 are pending
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed on 2/9/26 in this application after the allowance. 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under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on 2/9/26 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/9/26 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner has considered the IDS statement.
Rejection
Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection
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.
Claim 33 is 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 33 is rejected because it recites the limitation “ means”. It is unclear what include in the word means and render the claims indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim is indefinite.
Claim 33 is rejected because it recites the limitation “ said means”. It is unclear what include in word said means and render the claims indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim is indefinite.
Claim 33 is rejected because it recites the limitation “at least about 3%”. The limitations “at least” and “about” render the claims indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim is indefinite.
Claim Rejections, 35 U.S.C 112 1st Paragraph
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as containing subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 115-137 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph - written description requirement, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The amendments filed 2/9/26 is objected under 35 U.S.C. 132 because it introduces new matter into the disclosure (claim). 35 U.S.C. 132 states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
Claim 33 recites the phrase ‘a means for increasing the efficiency” and also “said means, wherein said means”; specification and original claims do not recite a means for increasing the efficiency” and also “said means, wherein said means---".
. The phrase added into the claim 33 was not part of the original specification and claims and the invention as claimed was not envisioned or foreseen as originally filed.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Conclusion
Claims 1-9, 13-32 are allowed, Claim 33 is rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Mohammad Meah whose telephone number is 571-272-
1261. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Robert Mondesi can be reached on 4089187584. 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.
/MOHAMMAD Y MEAH/Examiner, Art Unit 1652