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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 5 in the paragraph starting with “The working part of”, the phrase “outwer blade member 8” should be replaced with “outer blade member 8”.
On page 5 in the paragraph starting with “The working part of”, the disclosure that “inner blade member 7 has an edge 9” does not appear to correspond with Figure 2. In Figure 2, item 9 appears to be on outer blade member 8.
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.
Claims 5 and 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitations "the other end" on lines 10 and 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. The phrases should be respectively replaced with “another end”.
With regards to claim 5, the phrase “slot forming a gap” is unclear. It is unclear what structure represents the gap that is formed by the slot. As written, the gap is a sub structure of the slot which does not appear to be supported. There does not appear to be another space to represent the gap in relation to the slot and it is unclear if the “gap” limitation is needed.
With regards to claim 5, it is unclear what structure incorporates the “inner blade member” and the “outer blade member”. As written, these blade members are not part of the first working part of the first lever part. They merely define the slot. The paragraph should be amended to disclose the “first working part having an inner blade member and an outer blade member with a cutting edge, the cutting edge of the outer blade member is spaced from the inner blade member to define a longitudinal cutting slot”.
With regards to claim 5, as written, the cutting edge does not play a role in the definition of the slot which is not supported. It is unclear what is meant by “material of the outer blade member has a first cutting edge. See proposed language above.
With regards to claim 5, line 18, the phrase “it meets” is unclear. What limitation is represented by the word “it”?
With regards to claim 5 last 3 lines, the phrase “a constant gap is provided between the second working part…and the inner blade member over the length of the second cutting edge” is unclear. It is unclear how the gap is defined and how the length of the second cutting edge plays a role. The constant gap is labeled 11 and shown in Figure 10. The length of the second cutting edge is 5 and is shown in Figure 2. Figure 10 does not and can not shown the length of the second cutting edge and Figure 2 does not and cannot show the constant gap. It is recommended that a pivot axis about which the lever parts rotate be defined via the interconnection (4) and then disclose the second working part is spaced from the inner blade member in a way parallel to the pivot axis to define the constant gap.
With regards to claim 8, it is unclear what structure defines the “one end”. It is the inner and outer members of the first part that define an open end of the slot. The disclosure should be replaced with “the cutting edge of the outer blade member is spaced from the inner blade member in a way that the longitudinal cutting slot is open at one end”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Steinhardt (2,272,753).
With regards to claims 5 and 8, Steinhardt discloses the same invention including shears capable of cutting seams (title) having a first lever part (14, 26, 20) with a first working part at one end (14, 26) and a first handle at the other end (20), the first working par has at least one longitudinal slot forming a cutting gap (28), the cutting gap is capable of receiving cut material (Figs. 1-4), the slot (28) is defined by an inner blade member extending inwardly from the slot (26) and an outer blade member extending outwardly from the slot (14), material of the outer blade member has a first cutting edge (24), a second lever part (12, 18) has a second working part at one end (12) and a second handle at the other end (18), the lever parts are interconnected (16) and movable relative to each other (Figs. 1 and 3), the second working part has a second cutting (22), the outer blade member is positioned so that it meets the second cutting edge (Fig. 4), a constant gap is provided between the second working part and the inner blade member over the length of the second cutting edge (Fig. 4 shows surface 31 of the inner blade member 12 being offset from surface 31a of outer blade member 14 in a way that surface 31 is spaced away from surface 31b of the second working part 12 thereby defining the constant gap), and the slot is open at one end (28, Fig. 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11-5-25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to the arguments directed at the “constant gap” limitation, the Examiner disagrees because Steinhardt does disclose the constant gap limitation shown in Figure 4.
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 JASON DANIEL PRONE whose telephone number is (571)272-4513. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: 7:00 am-3:00 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, Boyer D Ashley can be reached on (571)272-4502. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
14 November 2025
/Jason Daniel Prone/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3724