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 .
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.
Claim 8 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.
The protrusion “inclines inwardly” in claim 8 is indefinite since the inward direction is unclear.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 14 and 17 are objected to: the term “is position” is grammatically incorrect. Suggest – is positioned –
Similarly, “a predetermine” in claim 1, “is configure” in claim 15, and “stretch position” in claims 14 and 15.
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.
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(s) 1 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Escobar et al (US 2011/0023220).
Escobar teaches in fig. 5 and [0025]-[0026] a sink drain strainer having a flange 14, a perforated cavity or basket strainer and a pull tab (post 16) with a grip flare 20 as claimed in these claims. The material of the basket or perforated cup 12 is elastomeric. The post 16 has a hole as seen in fig. 19.
PNG
media_image1.png
601
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
689
643
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2-8, 13, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Escobar et al (US 2011/0023220) in view of Zhu (US D976371).
Teaching of Escobar is described in rejection 1.Escobar fails to teach the protrusions on the flange as claimed.
Zhu teaches a drain strainer having a flange, a cavity with perforations, and the protrusions (curved ridges) to direct drain water to flow down in a vortex as claimed. This design is expressly titled as “hair catcher.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the design of Zhu into the design of Escobar to avail such advantages as Zhu affords.
Claim 17: reinforcement sleeve – while the references fail to show any additional reinforcement, providing adequate reinforcement in case the basket is too thin, or having the basket beefed up to have sufficient mechanical strength would have been prima facie obvious, unless otherwise shown.
Claim 18: the “petals” appears only as a pattern on the periphery of the flange, which does not appear to have any specific function other than aesthetic appearance. Therefore, this is not patentable in a utility patent. Applicant may consider a design patent application for this feature.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the catch, and the configurations of the top button and the plunger, in claim 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The configuration of the plunger, the top button and the catch to perform the function claimed in claim 14 is novel and patentable over the prior arts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Prem C Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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.
/KRISHNAN S MENON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777