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 Objections
Claims 2-8 are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.75(f) which read “If there are several claims, they shall be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals.”
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 2-8 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention:
In claim 2, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”, “the concrete splashes” and “the worker”.
In claim 3, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”.
Claim 3 is further rendered indefinite by the vague term “high-quality”.
In claim 4, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”.
In claim 5, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”, “the assembly” and “the head”.
In claim 6, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”, “the cone” and “the machine”.
In claim 7, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”.
Claim 7 is further rendered indefinite by the vague term “easy”.
In claim 8, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the device”, “the top”, “the cone” and the desired stopping position”.
In claim 8, the word “may” makes unclear what is required versus optional.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 1-3 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Benson (US 3,983,914). Regarding claim 1, Benson discloses a shield comprising a main plastic body (see col. 1, lines 50-52) and a set of adjustable straps (5). Regarding claim 2, the shield is capable of keeping splashes away (see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 3, the shield is made of plastic (see col. 1, lines 50-52). Regarding claim 5, the shield includes adjustable straps (5). Regarding claim 6, the shield includes adjustable straps (5). Regarding claim 7, the shield is easy to install and remove (see Figs. 1 and 2). Regarding claim 8, while this claim only has optional limitations as indicated by the word “may”, nonetheless a stationary strap system (5) is disclosed.
Claim 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ronsonet (US 5,078,189). Regarding claim 1, Ronsonet discloses a shield comprising a main plastic body (12) and a set of adjustable straps (36,38). Regarding claim 2, the shield is capable of keeping splashes away (see Fig. 4). Regarding claim 3, the shield is made of plastic (see col. 1, line 65). Regarding claim 4, the device consists of a plastic planar sheet designed in the form of a cone (see Figs. 1-4). Regarding claim 5, the shield includes adjustable straps (36, 38). Regarding claim 6, the shield includes adjustable straps (36, 38). Regarding claim 7, the shield is easy to install and remove (see Figs. 1-4). Regarding claim 8, while this claim only has optional limitations as indicated by the word “may”, nonetheless a stationary strap system (36,38) is disclosed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID L SORKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1148. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-3:30pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
DAVID L. SORKIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/DAVID L SORKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774