DETAILED ACTION
Election of 22 December 2025
Applicant’s election without traverse is again acknowledged:
PNG
media_image1.png
730
926
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 11-14, 23 and 24, being drawn to non-elected species, are withdrawn.
Claims 1-10,15-22 and 25-28 have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 1-10 and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
PNG
media_image2.png
439
758
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In claim 1 as amended, with respect to, “a core extending between opposing axial ends thereof”, it is unclear to what “thereof” refers. The “opposing axial ends” of the “flush chamber” or the “core”?
The preamble of independent claim 1 specifies a “filter arrangement”. As written the scope of claim 1 and what is intended by this recitation are both unclear. Is the recitation “filter arrangement” intended to define a complete operative apparatus capable of filtering a fluid, or some fraction thereof. In this regard, the transitional phrase “comprising” appears at both line 1 and line 2 of claim 1 making it unclear where the body of the claim begins, thus rendering the scope of the claim unclear and indefinite.
At line 3 of this claim a “flush chamber” is introduced. An individual skilled in the art would understand a “chamber” to be a void, volume, space or cavity. This language is not seen to define structure within the context of the claims. It is unclear what specific structure defines the claimed “flush chamber”. It is unclear what structure defines the boundaries of the “flush chamber”. It is unclear where the “flush chamber” begins or ends.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25-28 are allowed.
The incomprehensibility of claims 1-10 and 15-22 precludes application of prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments or amendments with respect to those previous rejections no longer appearing above and drawing objections have been effective at removing them.
Conclusion
This action is NOT final.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT JAMES POPOVICS whose telephone number is (571) 272-1164. The examiner can normally be reached from 10:00 AM - 6:00 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, JOSEPH DEL SOLE can be reached at (571) 272-11300. 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.
/ROBERT J POPOVICS/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights