Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This is a first office action on the merits for application serail number 18/442,268 filed 2/16/24. Claims 1-20 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
The information disclosure statement filed 5/13/24 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because it fails to properly cite a website, failed to include a date and failed to include a copy of the NPL. Attention is drawn to MPEP 707.05(e) section IX, particularly example 14.
Example 14:
(Product Manual/Catalogue or other information obtained from a website.
Corebuilder 3500 Layer 3 High-function Switch. Datasheet [online]. 3Com Corporation, 1997 [retrieved on 1998-02-24]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: www.3com.com/products/dsheets/400347.html>.
It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
The drawings are objected to because the uppermost refence number 126 in figure 4 appears to be in error. It is believed the upper most 126 should be 120?
PNG
media_image1.png
650
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
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 8-9 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.
The diameter defined in claim 8 is not clear. It is not even clear how the shaft has a diameter as it is not circular. Further yet as the bulge is an element of shaft how can the diameter be constant?
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D931,622 to Bettanin.
In the variant of Figures 8-14 Battanin provides each of the elements of the claims as shown in the marked up figures below.
2125 Drawings as Prior Art [R-08.2012]
I. DRAWINGS CAN BE USED AS PRIOR ART
Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together. Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928). The origin of the drawing is immaterial. For instance, drawings in a design patent can anticipate or make obvious the claimed invention as can drawings in utility patents. When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP § 2121.04 for more information on prior art drawings as “enabled disclosures.
PNG
media_image2.png
818
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
533
704
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect claim 15 , the top and bottom sides are respectively the first and second parallel flats ides and the curved sides are the third and fourth curved sides of the claims
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2019/0009151 to Breeden, III et al.
Breeden provides a grip or “handle” 12 having a body extending from proximal end to a distal end (Fig.22 shows the end when the taper portion is made separate). The grip having two parallel flat sides 34/36 connected by two curved sides 38/40.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7,10-14 and 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 8-9 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: a handle of the claimed shapes is not taught or adequately suggested in the prior art of record.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant should carefully the attached prior art as many of the refences would appear to meet at least claim 15 but have not been applied to avoid undue multiple rejections. Note in particular:
The golf grip of U.S. Patent 10,046,213 to Goldfader.
The brush handle of U.S. Patent 1,826,165 to Cartwright.
U.S. 2008/0251109 to Lee.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT CANFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6, some Saturdays.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 571-272-6670. 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.
ROBERT CANFIELD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/Robert Canfield/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636