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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7 June 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7 June 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Notice of Allowability on 6 May 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
However, non-patent literature reference to “all office actions” has been struck through. The listing of “All office actions” in the IDS is incorrect because MPEP 609.04(a) states, in part: “If applicant seeks consideration of documents other than the specification (including the claims) and drawings of an application, for example, Office actions, applicant must list such documents separately under the non-patent literature section or in a new section appropriately labeled. The USPTO would be understood to be the publisher/place of publication for a listed U.S. Office action or a U.S. application.” (emphasis added). Not only does “all office actions” not concretely list the pertinent actions that Applicant would like considered, it also cites office actions which may be published in the future. An Examiner could not reasonably sign off on having considered something which has not already occurred.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “housing:” in line 3 should be followed by a semi-colon, not a colon (--housing;), and the comma splice after “the side walls,” in line 8 should be removed. 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 1-10, 12, & 16-20 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.
Claim 1 requires “wherein each insert comprises: …wherein the base of the device comprises one or more slots configured to receive the downwardly depending tab;” - the scope of the claim phrase is unclear, since it positively modifies the base underneath of the phrasing dedicated to “each insert comprises:”. It is recommended that the “wherein the base…” phrase be moved out from the “each insert comprises:” phrase.
Claims 2-10, 12, & 16-20 are rejected as ultimately dependent from claim 1, rejected above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10, 12, & 16-20 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, as none have been found.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Morgan T. Jordan whose telephone number is (571)272-8141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30.
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, PETER POON can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/MORGAN T JORDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights