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 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 9 on the claim “the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged in a first direction” is believed to be in error for -the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged relative to each other in a first direction . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 9 on the claim “the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged in a first direction” is believed to be in error for -the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged relative to each other in a first direction . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 9 on the claim “the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged in a first direction” is believed to be in error for -the insertion port and water introduction hole are arranged relative to each other in a first direction . 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 1-20 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.
In each of the independent claims, the applicant has added the limitation “wherein the plurality of chip air holes are disposed on inner side with respect to a diameter of the water induction holes in the first direction”. It is unclear from the claim limitation what the applicant is trying to claim. It is noted that it is unclear what the “inner side” is and how the plurality of chip air holes are disposed on the inner side in the first direction. It is noted that the applicant claimed the plurality of chip holes sandwiching the water hole in the second direction which intersects the first direction. It is noted that since the chip air holes are required to sandwich the water hole in the second direction, it is unclear how the plurality of chip air holes can be arranged on an “inside” with respect to the diameter of the water hole in the first direction. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as the claimed plurality chip air holes, which are arranged in the second claimed direction which intersects the claimed first direction are arranged relative to the claimed water hole that a longitudinal axis between 2 opposing the plurality of chip air holes extending in the second direction, perpendicular to the first direction intersect at least a portion on the water hole, such as an inner portion of the radius on the water hole. This is shown in figure 6 where the plurality of water holes interest an outer portion of the water hole and in fig. 9 and 10. In each of the different embodiments, the plurality of chip air holes are arranged such that a longitudinal axis extending between opposing holes in the second direction perpendicular to the first direction, intersect a portion of the water hole.
The claims were interpreted as best understood as discussed above in detail.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The prior art fails to teach the claimed limitation of the chip air holes being disposed on inner side with respect to a diameter of the water introduction hole in the first direction as interpreted above in detail. It is noted that the limitation was interpreted as discussed above with respect to the 112 rejection above in determining allowability and the applicant should ensure that the dependent claims are amended to correspond to the amendments made in the independent claim to avoid any 112 issues in the dependent claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 HEIDI MARIE EIDE whose telephone number is (571)270-3081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-4:00.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 571-270-5614. 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.
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 6/8/2026
Prosecution Insights