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 Claim s 1 , 9 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: In Claim 1 , the recitation “to prevent the off-gas from come into direct contact with the humidification membranes” in lines 11-12 should read “to prevent the off-gas from coming into direct contact with the humidification membranes”. In Claim 9 , the recitation “wherein the gasket assembly includes a packing portion configured to have a hole , an end of the cartridge being inserted into the hole, and come into close contact with the end of the cartridge inserted into the hole to absorb a vibration in a horizontal direction” in lines 1-4 of said claim should read “wherein the gasket assembly includes a packing portion configured to have a hole , wherein an end of the cartridge is inserted into the hole and wherein the packing portion comes into close contact with the end of the cartridge inserted into the hole to absorb a vibration in a horizontal direction.” In Claim 20 , the recitation “ wherein the mid-case and the cap have a cross section in a width direction having a circular or polygonal shape ” should read “ wherein the cross section in a width direction of the mid-case and the cap has a circular or polygonal shape ”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim s 2-5 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 2 is indefinite because it recites the limitation "the preset angle" in line 3 of said claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, dependent claims 3 -5 are rejected as a result of their dependence on indefinite claim 2 , as they include all the limitations of claim 2 and they do not resolve the issues identified in rejections set forth above. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-2 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a(1) as being anticipated by Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation). Regarding Claim 1 , Kawabata teaches a fuel cell membrane humidifier (humidification device, P2/L11) comprising: a humidification module ( membrane module 1 , Figure 1 1 & P 7 /L 7 ) configured to humidify air supplied from the outside with moisture in an off-gas (water vapor, P10/L10) discharged from a fuel cell stack (polymer electrolyte fuel cell, P10/L15) (see P10/L8-15 which describes that membrane module is used to humidify fluid such as dry gas wherein dry gas could be dry air (P10/L17) with a fluid containing moisture from the fuel cell) ; and caps (first cover 22 & second cover 23, see P9/L1 & Figure 11 ) coupled to both ends (see P9/L1 which describes first cover 22 and second cover 23 are provided on both ends of the case body 21) of the humidification module ( membrane module 1, Figure 1 1 & P 7 /L 7 ) , respectively, wherein the humidification module ( membrane module 1, Figure 1 1 & P 7 /L 7 ) includes a mid-case ( case body 2 1 , P8/L21 & Figure 11 ) having an off-gas inlet (first opening 21a, P9/L9 & Figure 11 ) , the off-gas (water vapor, P10/L10 ) flowing into the inside through the off-gas inlet (first opening 21a , P9/L9 & Figure 11 ) ; at least one cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle , P 7 /L 8 & Figure 11 ) , disposed inside the mid-case ( case body 2 1 , P 8 /L 21 & Figure 11 ) and configured to accommodate a plurality of humidification membranes ( plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4, P7/L8-9 & Figure 11 ) (see Figure 3). and a humidification membrane protection member ( flow rectifying /straightening member s 6 1, 62, 71, 72, 73 74 P17/L17 – P18/L 15 & Figure s 11 -14 ) formed to be inclined toward the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle, P7/L8 & Figure 11 ) on an inner wall of the mid-case ( case body 2 1 , P8/L21 & Figure 11 ) having the off-gas inlet (first opening 21a) formed therein ( see Figure 11 which shows rectifying member 61 formed on the inner surface of case body 21 and inclined towards the first partition plate 31) , to prevent the off-gas ( water vapor ) from come into direct contact with the humidification membranes ( plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4) (see P17/L17 – P19/L14) . Regarding Claim 2, Kaw a bat a discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the humidification membrane protection member (flow rectifying/straightening members 61, 62, 71, 72, 73, 74 , see Figures 11-14 & P18/L4-15 ) includes a protection member body (flow rectifying/straightening members 61, 62, 71, 72, 73, 74 , see Figures 11-14 & P18/L4-15 ) formed to be inclined at the preset angle (see P19/L2-4) toward the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle ) on the inner wall of the mid-case ( case body 2 1 ). Regarding Claim 6 , Kawabata discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the humidification membrane (plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4,P7/L8-9 & Figure 11) is a hollow fiber membrane formed of a hollow membrane having an empty inside (see P4/L6-9 which describes a hollow fiber membrane with hollow interior). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1, 2 & 6 above in view of Kanazawa ( JP 2 008119615A ; see machine translation ) . Regarding Claim s 3 and 4 , Kaw a bat a discloses all of the limitations as set forth above but is silent on wherein the humidification membrane protection member includes at least one flow hole formed in the protection member bod y (as required by claim 3) and wherein the flow hole is formed not to be parallel to a direction of the off-gas inlet (as required by claim 4) . K anazawa teaches a fuel cell stack (fuel cell 12, Figure 1 & [0023]), humidification module ( humidifying membrane module s 22 , Figure 1 & [002 3 ]), humidification membrane ( humidifying membrane 56 , Figure 1 & [002 8 ]), mid-case ( assembly case 2 4 , Figure 1 & [002 4 ]), caps ( assembly case 24 , see Figure 1, [002 4 ]), off-gas inlet (inlet hole 30, Figure 1 & [0024]), cartridge ( rectangular parallelepiped plate 52, Figure 1 & [0027]). Kanazawa further discloses that the humidification module ( 22 ) humidifies air with an off-gas discharged from the fuel cell 12 (see [0024]) . Kanazawa further teaches a humidification membrane protection member (flow straightening grid, [0027]) , protection member body (through hole 44, [0027] & Figure 1,with flow hole ( small holes 82, 84 & 86, see Figure 4 & [00 2 9] ). Kanazawa further discloses that the through hole 44 in the flow straightening grid is inclined downward towards the direction of the cartridge ( rectangular parallelepiped plate 52) (see [0027] & Figure 1) and is thus not parallel to a direction of the off-gas inlet which reads on the requirement of claim 4 and further discloses that the configuration of the humidification membrane protection member (flow straightening grid) with the flow hole (small holes 82, 84, 86) which extends in a depth direction rectifies the flow of the off-gas passing through it and converts the off-gas from a turbulent flow into a laminar flow and thus stabilizes the flow of the off-gas (see [0029]). Kawabata and Kanazawa are analogous art to the claimed invention as both references are in the same fie l d of humidifiers for fuel cells . It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the protection member of Kawabata to include the flow holes of Kanazawa such that the turbulent flow of the incoming off-gas can be converted into a laminar flow and thus stabilize the flow of incoming off-gas. Regarding Claim 19 , Kaw a bat a discloses all of the limitations as set forth above but is silent on wherein the mid-case and the cap are independently formed of hard plastic or metal . Kanazawa teaches that the mid-case (assembly case 24) and cap (ass embly case 24) are made of aluminum or the like (see [0024]) which reads on a metal. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the mid-case and the cap of Kawabata with metal because of its thermal expansion property and to further to ensure the inside of the fuel cell humidifier is adequately protected (see [0020] of Kanazawa). Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1 -4, 6 & 19 above in view of Suzuki ( US 2009 / 0246598 A 1 ). Regarding Claim 5 , modified Kaw a bat a discloses all of the limitations as set forth above . While modified Kawabata discloses a humidification membrane protection ( flow straightening grid o f Kanazawa) comprising of at least one flow hole (small holes 82, 84 & 86 of Kanazawa), it is silent on wherein the flow hole is formed to be perpendicular to a direction of the protection member body . Suzuki teaches a flow rectifier 130 for rectifying the flow of a fuel gas in a fuel cell (see [0040]). Suzuki further teaches that the flow rectifier comprises of a plurality of holes 134 which are perpendicular to the surface of the flow rectifier (see [0040] & Figure 4). Suzuki teaches that teaches that the flow holes 134 are provided to prevent excessive pressure loss when fuel gas is supplied (see [0053]). Suzuki and Kanazawa are analogous art to the claimed invention as both references are in the same fie l d of fuel cells . It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the flow hole of modified Kawabata such that they are formed perpendicular to the direction of the protection member body in order to prevent excessive pressure loss in a fuel cell membrane humidifier. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1 - 6 & 19 above in view of Megale ( WO2022073137A1 ). Regarding Claim 7, modified Kaw a bat a discloses all of the limitations as set forth above but is silent on wherein the humidification membrane is a flat membrane formed of a pair of opposing membrane sheets . Megale teaches a fuel cell membrane humidifier (fuel cell humidifier, [007 2 ]), humidification module (humidification core 10, [Figure 1 & [007 2 ]), humidification membrane (membrane sheet s 22-1 & 22-2, see Figure 1A & [00 73 ]) wherein the membrane sheets are flat and are attached on opposing faces of a separator). Megale further teaches that flat-sheet humidifiers tend to have better vapor transport performance per membrane area, allowing more efficient use of the membrane area in the humidifier (see [0007]) . Megale further teaches that h ollow-fiber membranes tend to be more expensive than flat-sheet membranes on a per unit area basis and o verall, flat-sheet humidifiers may use less membrane, and lower cost membranes, to achieve similar performance to hollow-fiber humidifiers ([0007]) . Megale further discloses that flat-sheet designs can often achieve the same performance as a comparable hollow-fiber humidifier within a smaller geometric volume (see [0007]). Kawabata and Megale are analogous art to the claimed invention as both references are in the same fie l d of fuel cell humidifiers . It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a flat membrane as a humidification membrane in a fuel cell humidifier to improve vapor transport performance per membrane area and reduce cost on a per unit area basis. Claims 8- 12, 14, 16-18 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1 -7 & 19 above in view of Cho ( KR20210114716A ; see machine translation ). Regarding Claim s 8 & 9 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle, P7/L8 & Figure 11 ) accommodates a plurality of hollow fiber membranes (plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4) (see P7/L20-21 which describes that the hollow fiber membrane bundle is disposed between the first partition plate 31 and second partition plate 32 inside the case body 21 ). Kawabata is silent on the fuel cell membrane humidifier further comprises a gasket assembly airtightly coupled to each end of the humidification module through mechanical assembly (as required by Claim 8) and wherein the gasket assembly includes a packing portion configured to have a hole , an end of the cartridge being inserted into the hole, and come into close contact with the end of the cartridge inserted into the hole to absorb a vibration in a horizontal direction; an edge portion formed to be connected to the packing portion and interposed in a space formed by a groove formed at an end of the mid-case and an end of the cap; and a sealing portion formed between the cartridge and the packing portion to come into contact with the cartridge and the packing portion (as required by Claim 9) 166504 2975008 0 0 Cho teaches a fuel cell membrane humidifier (membrane humidifier for a fuel cell, see [0026]) further comprises a gasket assembly (support plates 300 , see annotated Figure 4 & [0026] . Cho further teaches that the support plates 300 are fixed onto the longitudinal ends of a hollow fiber membrane cartridge (see [0015]). Cho further teaches that the support plates 300 is not fixedly coupled to the housing by an epoxy but rather coupled to the housing in a detachably fitting manner such that the hollow fiber membrane cartridges can easily be removed (see [0026]) and further teaches that the outer end of the support plates 300 is provided with a gasket ring 310 so that the space between the outer end of the support plate 300 and the inner wall of the housing 100 can be completely sealed (see [0027]). Cho and Kawabata are analogous art to the claimed invention as both references are in the same fie l d of fuel cell humidifiers . It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the support plates of Cho to the fuel cell membrane humidifier of Kawabata which further comprises a gasket ring attached to the outer of the support plate to ensure complete sealing . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further incorporate the gasket plate of Cho which coupled in a detachably fitting manner such that it allows for easy removal of the hollow fiber membrane cartridge. Further r egarding Claim 9 , modified Kawabata teaches wherein the gasket assembly ( support plates 300 ) includes a packing portion ( see annotated Figure 4 ) configured to have a hole ( through-hole 302 , see [0027] & annotated Figure 4 ) wherein an end of the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle of Kawabata ) is inserted into the hole ( through-hole 302 ) and wherein the packing portion (see annotated Figure 4 ) comes into close contact with the end of the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle of Kawabata ) inserted into the hole ( through-hole 302 ) to absorb a vibration in a horizontal directio n (see [0027] which describes gasket ring on support plate ensures complete sealing) an edge portion (see annotated Figure 4 ) formed to be connected to the packing portion ( see annotated Figure 4 ) and interposed in a space (see annotated Figure 10) formed by a groove (see annotated Figure 10) formed at an end of the mid-case (case body 21) and an end of the cap (first cover 22 & second cover 23); and a sealing portion ( O-ring , see [00 27 ]) formed between the cartridge (hollow fiber membrane bundle) and the packing portion ( see annotated Figure 4 ) to come into contact with the cartridge (hollow fiber membrane bundle) and the packing portion ( see annotated Figure 4 ). It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the support plate of Cho having the above cited features to adequately support the cartrid ge of Kawabata and provide complete sealing within a fuel cell humidifier module (see [0027] of Cho) . 0 328930 Regarding Claim 10 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches a body member ( see annotated Figure 4 ) having a hole ( through-hole 302 ) formed therein, an end of the cartridge (hollow fiber membrane bundle) being inserted into the hole ( through-hole 302 ) ; and a protrusion member ( see annotated Figure 4 ) formed at one end of the body member ( see annotated Figure 4 ) and in close contact with the end of the cartridge (hollow fiber membrane bundle) inserted into the hole ( through-hole 302 ) . Regarding Claim 11 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the cartridge ( hollow fiber membrane bundle ) includes an inner case (first partition plate 31 & second partition plate 32, P9/L10-12 & Figure 2 of Kawabata ) having openings formed at ends thereof (see Figure 2) , the plurality of hollow fiber membrane s (plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4) being accommodated in the inner case (first partition plate 31 & second partition plate 32 ) ( see P7/L20-21 ) ; and potting portions (sealing portion, see P8/L4-13) configured to close the openings of the inner case (first partition plate 31 & second partition plate 32 ) ( see Figure 11 & P7/L21-P8/L4 ) , ends of the plurality of hollow fiber membranes ( plurality of hollow fiber membrane 4) being fixed to the potting portion (sealing portion ) ( see P8/L4-13) . Regarding Claim 12 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein at least a part of the potting portion (sealing portion) is located outside the inner case (first partition plate 31 & second partition plate 32 ) ( see Figure 11 ) , and the protrusion member ( see annotated Figure 4 ) is pressed against and comes in close contact with the potting p ortion (sealing portion). Regarding Claim 14 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the edge portion (see annotated Figure 4) includes edge wings (see annotated Figure 4) protruding in both directions (see annotated Figure 4) , and the edge wings (see annotated Figure 4) are interposed with the groove (see annotated Figure 10) formed at the end of the mid-case ( case body 2 1) wherein the edge wings (see annotated Figure 4) seal the end of the mid-case (case body 21) and the end of the cap (first cover 22 & second cover 23) Regarding Claim s 16 -18 modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above but is silent on wherein the humidification module includes two or more cartridges, the gasket assembly includes two or more holes into which the two or more cartridges are inserted (as required by Claim 16), wherein the gasket assembly include two or more protrusion members (as required by Claim 17) , and two or more sealing portions formed between the cartridge and the packing portion to come into contact with the cartridge and the packing portion (as required by Claim 18) Cho teaches a humidification module (membrane humidifier for a fuel cell, see [0026] ) comprising of three cartridges (hollow fiber membrane cartridges 400) (see Figure 2). Cho further teaches a gasket assembly (support plate 300) comprised of three through-holes 302 into which the three cartridges 400 may be inserted (see [0027] & Figure 2) which reads on claim 16. Cho further teaches a gasket assembly comprising of two or more protrusion members (see annotated Figure 10) which reads on claim 17 and further teaches two or more sealing portions (O-ring, see [0027] which describes that O-ring is provided on the inner surface of the through hole 302 so that the through-hole 302 is formed) which reads on claim 18. It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have increased the number of cartridges in a fuel cell humidifier to improve its capacity to retain moisture and thus increase the power generation efficiency of the fuel cell (see [0004] of Cho). Regarding Claim 20 , modified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. While Kawabata discloses that it is preferable that the shape of the main part of the case is hexahedral (see P5/L12-13) which reads on a circular or polygonal shape cross section in a width direction of the mid-case , Kawabata does not explicitly state wherein the mid-case and the cap have a cross section in a width direction having a circular or polygonal shape . Cho discloses a polygonal cross section of both the mid-case (body 110, [0035]) and the cap (first end cap 120, [0035]) (see Figure 2). It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cap of Kawabata to have the same cross-sectional shape as the mid-case such that it fits with the mid-case and ensures complete sealing of the fuel cell humidifier. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1 - 1 2, 14 , 1 6-20 above in view of Matoba ( JP2007218539A ; see machine translation ). While m odified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses the protrusion member (see annotated Figure 4 of Cho ) is pressed against and comes in close contact with the inner case (first partition plate 31 & second partition plate 32 of Kawabata ), it does not explicitly disclose wherein the entire potting portion is located inside the inner case . Matoba discloses a fuel cell membrane humidifier (humidifying device, see [0010] which describes a humidifying device humidifies a gas supplied to a fuel cell) comprising of a hollow fiber membrane module 1 further composed of a hollow fiber membrane bundle 7 disposed in a n inner case (module case 5, see [001 1 ] & Figure 1) . Matoba further teaches that the upper and lower ends of the hollow fiber membrane bundle 7 are fixed by end plates 9 & 11 which are made up of potting portion (potting portion made of molten resin, see [0012] and wherein each hollow fiber membrane penetrates vertically) which is enclosed within the module case 5 (see Figure 1). Matoba and Kawabata are analogous art to the claimed invention as both references are in the same fie l d of fuel cell humidifiers . It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the potting portion of Kawabata such that the entire potting portion is located inside the inner case and therefore limit the amount of potting portion used in the fuel cell humidifier thus reducing overall cost of material. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata (JP 2004202478A; see machine translation) as applied to Claims 1-14, 16-20 above in view of Rakauskas ( US6685197B1 ) While m odified Kawabata teaches all of the limitations as set forth above , modified Kawabata is silent on wherein each of the packing portion and the edge portion has a first hardness of 30 to 70 Shore A, and the fuel cell membrane humidifier further comprises a reinforcing member formed to be inserted into at least a part of the packing portion and at least a part of the edge portion, the reinforcing member having a second hardness higher than the first hardness R akauskas teaches a gasket assembly (gasket 30, see annotated Figure 3 & C2/L59 ) comprised of packing portion ( upper and lower sealing layers 50, 52, see annotated Figure 3 & C2/L66 ) and edge portion (see annotated Figure 3) wherein the gasket 30 comprises of a reinforcing member (perforated metallic core 40, see annotated Figure 3 & C2/L60 ) formed between the packing portion (50,52) and extends to the edge portion of the gasket (30) (see annotated Figure 3) which reads on the reinforcing member formed to be inserted into at least a part of the packing portion and at least a part of the edge portion . R akauskas further teaches that the p erforated metallic core 40 is preferably made of steel material (see C2/L60-61 ) and the sealing layers (50,52) of gasket assembly (30) are comprised of a resilient pre-cured rubber silicone material (see C2/L67-C3/L1-2 ) . Rakauskas discloses that the metallic core is designed to reinforce planar-style gaskets to facilitate handling of the gasket (see C 1 /L 16-24 ) . Regarding wherein each of the packing portion and the edge portion has a first hardness of 30 to 70 Shore A , it is submitted, however, that first hardness is simply a measurement of, and thus descriptions of, inherent properties of the claimed packing portion and edge portion. In the Instant Specification, Applicant discloses the instant packing portion 131 and the edge portion 132 may be formed of an elastic material (for example, silicone or rubber in [0070]) and that instant r einforcing member 134 may be formed of metal, a thermoplastic or thermosetting resin, or the like in [0076]. MPEP § 2112.01.II states that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. Therefore, as the silicone rubber packing portion and the perforated metallic reinforcing member of Rakauskas are substantially identical to the instant packing portion, edge portion and reinforcing membe r , it appears reasonable that the silicone rubber packing portion and reinforcing member of Rakauskas would inherently possess properties such that they would necessarily fulfill the recited limitations, i.e. wherein each of the packing portion and the edge portion has a first hardness of 30 to 70 Shore A and the reinforcing member having a second hardness higher than the first hardness . 57150 213995 Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT FIKI V OWHOSO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3418 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Basia Ridley can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 5712725453 . 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. /F.V.O./ Examiner, Art Unit 1725 /CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725 March 31, 2026