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 .
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.
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 1-12 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the vacuum in a second chamber" in Line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes it is unclear if ‘the vacuum’ is meant to refer to the ‘vacuum…sealed in a first chamber’ and if it is how that vacuum is meant to be sealed in a first chamber but is also somehow in a second chamber.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the inside" in Line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “reduced” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “reduced” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 10 recites ‘a peripheral wall’ and is dependent back to claim 1 which recites the same making it unclear if the recitation in claim 10 is meant to refer to that of claim 1 or not.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the absolute vacuum pressure" in Line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the push button section features" in Line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 is unclear whether it is meant to be a dependent claim or independent claim. It is unclear exactly what the intended scope is meant to be.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is: Berthier et al. (US 2017/0172481), Antonio et al. (US 2017/0290533), Chickering, III et al. (US 2018/0008183), Beyerlein et al. (US 2019/0000365), Chae et al. (US 2020/0178899), Ivosevic et al. (US Patent No. 11696711), Mitchen et al. (US Patent No. 5070886), Bengtsson (US 2004/0162521), Hagino et al. (US 2007/0233011), Kriesel et al. (US Patent No. 6126637), Queval (WO 2019/220340 A1). Whether alone or in combination these references do not fairly disclose each and every limitation of the claimed invention as a whole.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK FERNANDES whose telephone number is (571)272-7706. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9AM-3PM EST.
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, JASON SIMS can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/PATRICK FERNANDES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791