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 .
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-3 stand rejected under Section 102 in view of Choung. Claim 4 stands rejected under Section 103 in view of Choung and Kim. Claims 5-8 stand rejected under Section 103 in view of Choung, Tajima, and Bang. Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under Section 103 in view of Choung, Tajima, Bang, with evidence from Shima. Claim 9 stands rejected under Section 103 in view of Choung, Tajima, Bang, and Kim. Claims 5-9 stand rejected under Section 112(b) The abstract stands objected to.
Applicants amended claims 1 and 5, canceled claims 4 and 9, and added new claims 15-22. Applicants provided an abstract. Applicants argue that the application is in condition for allowance.
Turning first to the abstract: Applicants did not provide a marked-up version of the abstract. See MPEP § 714(II)(B). Because the abstract has not been marked-up, the abstract is not entered. Please re-submit the abstract with mark-ups or with the instruction to cancel the originally filed abstract and replace it with the new abstract.
Section 112(b): Applicants’ amendments to claim 5 address the previously noted Section 112(b) rejections and are accepted and entered. No new matter has been added. The previously noted Section 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Section 102 rejections: Applicants’ amendments overcome the previously noted Section 102 rejections. These rejections are withdrawn.
Section 103 rejections: Applicants’ amendments overcome the previously noted Section 103 rejections. These rejections are withdrawn.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the changes in the Abstract were not shown in the Abstract that was submitted with applicants’ response. See MPEP § 714(II)(B):
Specifically regarding amendments to the abstract of the disclosure, where the amendments to the abstract are minor in nature, the abstract should be provided as a marked-up version under 37 CFR 1.121(b)(2)(ii) using strike-through and underlining as the methods to show all changes relative to the immediate prior version. Where the abstract is being substantially rewritten and the amended abstract bears little or no resemblance to the previously filed version of the abstract, a new (substitute) abstract may be provided in clean form accompanied by an instruction for the cancellation of the previous version of the abstract. The text of the new abstract must not be underlined. It would be counterproductive for applicant to prepare and provide an abstract so riddled with strike-through and underlining that its meaning and language are obscured from view and comprehension. Whether supplying a marked-up version of a previous abstract or a clean form new abstract, the abstract must comply with 37 CFR 1.72(b) regarding the length and placement of the abstract on a separate sheet of paper.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—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 or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1: This claim has been amended to require that the sealing layer include a closed void between the rib and the upper portion of the partition in the third direction. The void is not mentioned in the disclosure. For purposes of this discussion, Office assumes that applicants are referring to this feature in their Figure 3:
PNG
media_image1.png
438
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
There is no indication that this feature is completely closed off to form a void. The Office notes in a related, later-filed, application, applicants clearly indicated a void. See Takayama, U.S. Pat. No. 12,543,450, Figure 3; see also Takayama claim 5.
PNG
media_image2.png
410
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Returning to the pending application, the disclosure is not clear that the feature in applicants’ Figure 3 is a void. Because the claim limitation is not supported by the originally filed disclosure, claim 1 is rejected for failing to meet the written description requirement.
Claims 2, 3, and 15-18 are rejected for depending from rejected base claim 1.
Regarding claim 5: Claim 5 has been amended to require a sealing layer that includes a closed void between the rib and the upper portion of the partition in the third direction. As with claim 1, this feature is not supported by the originally filed disclosure. The discussion of claim 1 is incorporated by reference. Because the newly added claim limitation is not supported by the originally filed disclosure, claim 5 is rejected for failing to meet the written description requirement.
Claims 6-8 and 19-22 are rejected for depending from rejected base claim 5.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA KATHLEEN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/Victoria K. Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897