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. DETAILED ACTION Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “ a protrusion positioned at an acute angle disposed at the end of each blade there is and at the inner surface of each blade, a protrusion disposed at obtuse angle to the blade is disposed closer to the center , the blades inserted into the impeller by 20% in relation to the base diameter ” per claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings also do not show “ an impeller, an axle holding/supporting a rotating rim with blades and a cover, the impeller is a solid piece formed as a rim with stiffeners ”. It appears the blades are being double counted as both part of the impeller and the blades. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 3-4 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 3 recites “and a hollow sleeve positioned at the central part there is for receiving an axle”. It is unclear how there is modifies the claim. It is also unclear what central part is being referenced because it lacks antecedent basis and is unclear if the central part applies to the impeller, the stiffeners or the blades. For examination purposes Examiner will interpret this as “ and a hollow sleeve positioned at a central part of the impeller for receiving an axle ”. This “there is” issue is found later in the claim as well. Claim 3 recites “a protrusion positioned at an acute angle disposed at the end of each blade”. It is unclear what structures the acute angle is between. For examination purposes Examiner will consider any acute angle between a protrusion and anything else to meet the claim limitation. Claim 3 recites “a protrusion disposed at obtuse angle to the blade is disposed closer to the center”. It is unclear if this refers to a new protrusion or the protrusion previously disclosed. There also appears to be a word missing before the word obtuse. It is also unclear what structures the obtuse angle is between . The claim also discloses “the center”. It is unclear what center is being referenced and this term lacks antecedent basis. For examination purposes Examiner will consider any obtuse angle between a protrusion , which may be the same or different from the previous protrusion, and anything else and the center to be the center of the entire device to meet the claim limitatio n. Claim 3 recites “the blades inserted into the impeller by 20% in relation to the base diameter”. The base diameter lacks antecedent basis. It is unclear what structure 20% is referenced in relation to. For examination purposes Examiner will consider any structure to have a base diameter and that as long as an object is inserted at least 20% in relationship to any structures of the device the claim limitation is met. Claim 3 recites “impeller stiffeners”. This lacks antecedent basis and Examiner will consider this to refer to the stiffeners. Claim 3 recites “an axle holding/supporting a rotating rim with blades and a cover”. It is unclear if the axle holds, supports, or both. For examination purposes Examiner will consider either to meet the claim limitation. Claim 3 recites “an axle” twice. It is unclear how many axles are present. For examination purposes Examiner will consider there is at least one axle. Claim 3 recites “ a cover ” twice. It is unclear how many axles are present. For examination purposes Examiner will consider there is at least one cover. Applicant is encouraged to go through the claim language for additional clarity issues. The number of clarity issues in the claims make it difficult to determine the scope of the claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 . Claim (s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent in view of 6352473 to Clark (Clark). Regarding claim 3, Clark teaches a base (30 and/or 14 , Figure s 2 and 8) , an impeller ( 26, 42, 44, 46, and 48 , Figure s 3 and 8) , an axle (16, Figure 7) holding/supporting a rotating rim (28, Figures 4 and 7) with blades (38, Figures 4 and 7) and a cover (60, Figure 7) , the impeller is a solid piece formed as a rim (26a, Figures 3 and 7) with stiffeners ( 42, 44, 46, and 48, Figure 8 ) , and the blades being located at outside edges of the rim (shown in Figures 4 and 7) , and a hollow sleeve positioned at the central part there is for receiving an axle (20, 30, and/or 32, Figures 2-4, 7, and 8) , the blades are formed having a convex shape (shown in Figure 4) , a protrusion positioned at an acute angle disposed at the end of each blade there is and at the inner surface of each blade ( blade has an extension that can be considered a protrusion, additionally the blade can be considered to be a blade with protrusions on the end of which the protrusion at the end is positioned at an acute angle and so is the extension in Figure 4 ) , a protrusion disposed at obtuse angle to the blade is disposed closer to the center ( blade has an extension that can be considered a protrusion, additionally the blade can be considered to be a blade with protrusions on the end of which the protrusion at the end is positioned at an obtuse angle and so is the extension in Figure 4 ) , the blades inserted into the impeller by 20% in relation to the base diameter (shown in Figures 1-8 where the blades are inserted into the base diameter at least 20%) , impeller stiffeners are arch shaped and follow a contour of the blades (shown in Figure 3) , a cover extending outwardly having a sleeve in a center thereof to accommodate the axle (60, Figure 7) Regarding claim 4, Clark teaches wherein the impeller and the cover are wade of plastic (Abstract, Col. 4 line 61 – Col. 5 line 8 as well as other mentions of plastic throughout the specification). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT STEVEN S ANDERSON II whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-2055 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8-5 . 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 Michael Hoang can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 574-272-6460 . 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. /STEVEN S ANDERSON II/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762