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
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Regarding claim 1, this claim is objected to because of the following informalities:
this claim appears to be formatted in a manner that failed to conform with the U.S. formatting practice of claims. That is, because the claim is written as a one long paragraph, it is ambiguous to identify the preamble from the body of the claim.
Further, this claim introduces the term “a tableware piece”, in line 1, and appears to refer to the term as “the piece” in lines 5, 24, 27 and 43, as “said piece” in lines 15 and 35 and as “said/the tableware piece” in lines 13, 20, 30, 37 and 39. It’s a good practice to keep the same claim terminology when referring to the same element throughout the claim set to avoid ambiguity.
Further, this claim recites “a shaped disc comprising a perimeter and two principal surfaces either side of said perimeter, being a first principal surface and a second principal surface”, in lines 2 – 3, and is grammatically incorrect.
Further, this claim recites “wherein one of said three outermost upstand surface points, one in each of the three 120 degree sectors”, in lines 16 – 17, and is grammatically incorrect.
Further, this claim recites “within 6mm, 4mm, 2mm” in lines 36 and 48 and should be “within 6mm, 4mm, or 2mm”
Further, this claim recites “an infusing product” in line 27 and “said infusion product” in line 39 the two terms should read identical.
Regarding claim 6, this claim recites ““within 3, 2, 1mm” in line 2 and should be ““within 3, 2, or 1mm”.
Regarding claim 7, this claim recites “substantially horizontal surface wherein the top recess perimeter”, lines 10 – 11, appears to miss a comma between “surface” and “wherein”.
This claim further recites ““within 1, 2, 3, 4mm” in line 12 and should be ““within 1, 2, 3 or 4mm”.
Regarding claim 16, this claim recites “a radial dimension gd of 3 – 7, 7 – 12 or more that 12 mm”, in lines 3 – 4 and it is ambiguous what “gd” represents as it is written in a manner that can be confused with a typo.
Regarding claim 36, this claim recites “said first surface… said second surface”, in lines 3 - 4, and should be “said first principal surface… said second principal surface”.
Appropriate corrections are 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 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 15, 16, 36, 40, 57 and 87 – 91 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.
Regarding claim 1, this claim recites the limitations “the outside surface” in line 5, and “the rim of the vessel" in line 8 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim, rendering the claim indefinite
This claim further recites “an upper ledge” in lines 18 and 21 and is unclear whether one is in reference to the other or two different upper ledges are claimed, rendering the claim indefinite. dependent claims 2– 3, 5 – 7, 15, 16, 36, 40, 57– 58, 60 – 61, 63 and 87 – 91 inherit these rejections by virtue of their dependency.
This claim further recites “a vessel” in line 22, but “a vessel” is already introduced in line 7 and is unclear whether one is in reference to the other or two different vessels are claimed, rendering the claim indefinite.
This claim further recites “a rim” in line 24, but the rim already introduced in line 8 and is unclear whether one is in reference to the other or two different rims are claimed, rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 5, this claim recites the terms “a lower ledge”, in line 2, “an upper ledge”, in line 4, and “an outermost upstand surface point”, in line 6. All of these terms are already introduced in claim 1 and it is unclear whether the terms should be in reference to the terms in claim 1 or are additional lower ledge, upper ledge and outermost upstand surface points, rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 7, this claim recites “said well by being located on one of said well”, lines 6 – 7, and it is unclear what the term “one of said well” is referring to as inly one well is introduced in claim 1, rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding claims 57, 87 – 91, each of these claims recite “a rim” in step I of the claims, but the rim already introduced in claim 1 and is unclear whether these recitations of the rim are in reference to claim 1 or two different rims are claimed, rendering the claim indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1– 3, 5 – 7, 14, 16, 36, 40, 57 – 58, 60 – 61, 63 and 87 – 91 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objections and 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 Hill (US 2017/0196236 A1) failed to teach or reasonably suggest a vessel tableware piece, “wherein the tableware piece acts as a lid to the vessel with the second principal surface uppermost with said upper ledge located on said rim and said three outermost upstand surface points located within said vessel, ….wherein one of said three outermost upstand surface points is pushed laterally against the inside of said vessel within one of said three 120 degree sectors each of the other two of said three outermost upstand surface points is located within 6mm, 4mm, 2mm of a point on the inside of the vessel within one of the other two 120 degree” as recited in claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DILNESSA B BELAY whose telephone number is (571)272-3136. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx. 8:00 am - 5:30 pm 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/DILNESSA B BELAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
