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
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are currently pending. Claim 12 was canceled per Applicant. Claims 3, 5-6, 9 and 13 remain rejected despite Applicant’s arguments filed 04/13/2026. Claims 1-2, 4, 7-8, 10-11 and 14-21 are allowed. Amendment necessitated new grounds of rejection presented within this Office action. Claims contain outstanding 112(b) rejections. Response to Applicant arguments can be found at the end of this Office action. This Office action is final.
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 3, 5-6, 9 and 13 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 the limitation "the contact region". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the longitudinal direction". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the geometry" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the bearing elements of the eccentric elements" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitations "the contact region" in line 1 and “the legs in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4, 7-8, 10-11 and 14-21 are allowed.
Claims 3, 5-6, 9 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to teach the combination of limitations recited in independent claims 1 and 14.
More specifically, the prior art fails to teach wherein the rail foot is held down by the spring element independently of the plate element as claimed within claims 1 and 14. Examiner agrees with Applicant arguments (see Remarks filed 04/13/2026, pg.9) regarding the implementation of the amended limitations to claims 1 and 14. The implementation of the amended limitations would require reconfiguration of the arrangement of both Chun et al. (KR 200453894 Y1) and Dietze et al (EP 1508642 A1) as previously cited and would change the principle of operation of reference.
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 HEAVEN BUFFINGTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm ET.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-8300. 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.
/HEAVEN R BUFFINGTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights