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
Claims 2-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 2, on line 2, replace “; and “ with --.--.
Regarding Claim 3, on line 2, change “the base of claim 2; and” to --the base.--
Regarding Claim 4, on line 4, change “; and” to --.--.
Regarding Claim 5, on line 4, change “; and” to --.--.
Regarding Claim 6, on line 4, change “; ” to --.--.
Regarding Claim 7, on line 1, change “A banjo mute or damper” to --The banjo mute and damper--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 4-6 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claims have not been further treated on the merits.
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 1-7 (claims 2-3 as being dependent claims) 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 recites the limitation "said upper post and platform" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggest amending the claim as follows:
A banjo mute and damper comprising: a two-piece height-adjustable apparatus with a flat upper platform wherein a first piece contacts the underside of a banjo head, and wherein a wherein the mechanism of adjustment is a hollow post supporting said flat upper platform which recesses into an opening of a second lower component which rests on said coordinator rod or dowel stick, wherein the recess hollow post and flat upper platform.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "wooden base as in claim 2" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggest amending the claim as follows:
The banjo mute and damper as in claim 3, further comprising wherein the hollow post ; and wherein said hollow post mates with or houses said spring or screw .
Claim 5 recites “such as leather or foam, or harder damping material such as brass or wood”. The phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Examiner suggest amending the claim as follows:
The banjo mute and damper as in claim 4, further comprising a flat platform supported by said hollow post a .
Regarding Claim 6, lines 2-4 recite “which may isolate”, “may be notched”, and “may support”. It is unclear what is meant by “may isolate”, “may be notched” and “may support”. Examiner suggest amending the claim as follows:
The banjo mute and damper as in claim 5, further comprising a protective layer of flat material beneath said s it from contacting and damaging the banjo's dowel stick or coordinator rod; and wherein said protective layer is notched to secure it by means of pressure to said coordinator rod; and wherein said protective layer s said screw or spring .
Regarding Claim 7, lines 1-3 recite “wherein said apparatus may be applied for benefit of tonal and volume changes in other stringed musical instruments which many accommodate its design and basic”. It is unclear what is meant by “may be applied for “ and “which may accommodate”. Additionally, line 5 recites “such as the wooden back or brace of a guitar”. The phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEDEI K. HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)270-7938. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 10am - 6pm.
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, Andrea Wellington can be reached at 571-272-4483. 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.
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837