DETAILED ACTION 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. This is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 1-17 are pending. Claim Objections Claim s 5 a n d 7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5: In line 1, “ wherein at the non-integral, bonded co rn er ” appears to be a misstatement of “ wherein at [[ the ]] each non-integral, bonded co rn er ” since there may be more than one such corner (claim 1, line 15: “wherein at least one corner of the four corners of the frame is a non-integral, bonded corner,” emphasis added). In line 2, Applicant is respectfully advised to amend to “ the elongate outer sidewall of [[ a ]] the first frame portion ” to acknowledge the antecedent (claim 1, line 17 : “ a first frame portion of a pair of neighboring frame portions ”). Claim 7 : In line 5 , “ a first frame portion of a pair of neighboring frame portions ” appears to be a misstatement of “ [[ a ]] the first frame portion of [[ a ]] the pair of neighboring frame portions” in view of the antecedents (lines 3-4: “the first frame portion of a pair of neighboring frame portions” and claim 1, line 17: “ a first frame portion of a pair of neighboring frame portions ” ). 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 9 and 14 -15 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 9 recites, “ wherein the reinforcing plate is reverse-folded with respect to the elongate downstream flange of the first frame portion, from which the reinforcing plate integrally extends .” It is unclear what is meant by a reinforcing plate that is reverse-folded as claimed. Referring to the disclosure, p. 9 defines “reverse” folding in lines 20-29 as a case in which areas of a frame piece are folded the opposite way, i.e. so that, along the score, the opposing faces of the areas move toward each other (e.g. so as to narrow or close off the groove formed by the scoring). Therefore, the term requires two folds, so that one can be folded the opposite way of the other. The example of Fig. 2 is given, in which fold lines 35 and 45 are open-folded, so fold line 55 may need to be reverse-folded. Looking at Fig. 2, one can imagine how, with respect to a single surface of the material, the material is folded in the same rotational direction at 35 and 45, but folded in the opposite direction at 55 , which may be considered a “reverse” fold . However, it is unclear how this configuration can be analogized to the reinforcing plate fold . R einforcing plate 101 (Fig. 5; p. 12, line 26) extends from downstream flange 60 at fold line 106 (p. 13, lines 13-14). But the downstream flange is an elongate flange (claim 1, line 9), with no parallel fold to be folded in the opposite way of the fold at 106 , so it is unclear how in what sense the fold at 106 is a “reverse” fold. At p. 15 , lines 13-15, similar language is used as in the claim (“that plate 101 be "reverse-folded" (relative to downstream flange 60 from which it extends) along fold line 106”), so this text does not assist in defining the term as it is applied to the claim. Referring to Fig. 4, it is noted that opposing folds 106 at reinforcing plates 101 on opposite sides of a single downstream flange 60 appear to not be “reverse” in the sense discussed at p. 9, lines 20-29, and it is within the scope of the claim for the re to be o nly one non-integral, bonded corner, so claim 9 does not appear to be interpretable as referring to the direction of another reinforcing plate fold. Claim 14: The claim recites, “ the second pair of opposing frame pieces .” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. It is noted that the claim does not depend from claim 13 (“ a second pair of opposing frame pieces ”). Claim 15 is rejected because of its dependence from claim 14. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: A thorough search for pertinent prior art did not locate any prior art that discloses or suggests the invention recited in claims 1-17. The concept of a nestable framed air filter, comprising: an air filter media comprising an at least generally rectangular perimeter with four major elongate edges; and, a four-cornered frame comprising four elongate frame portions, each elongate frame portion being mounted on one of the four major elongate edges of the filter media and with pairs of neighboring frame portions meeting to form a corner of the four corners of the frame; wherein each of the four elongate frame portions comprises an elongate inner sidewall and an elongate outer sidewall that meet at a sidewall junction, an elongate upstream flange that meets the elongate outer sidewall at an outer junction, and an elongate downstream flange that meets the elongate inner sidewall at an inner junction; wherein for each frame portion, the elongate outer sidewall is oriented at an inclination angle Ω of from 110 to 160 degrees and the elongate outer sidewall and the elongate inner sidewall meet at the sidewall junction to form a sidewall angle a that is less than 30 degrees, and wherein the framed air filter is nestable; and further wherein at least one corner of the four corners of the frame is a non-integral, bonded corner with a reinforcing plate that integrally extends from an end of an elongate downstream flange of a first frame portion of a pair of neighboring frame portions that meet to form the non-integral, bonded corner, with the reinforcing plate being in inward, substantially coplanar overlapping relation with, and being affixed to, a corner-proximate bonding area of an elongate inner sidewall of a second frame portion of the pair of neighboring frame portions , and with the proviso that the first frame portion of the pair of neighboring frame portions that meet to form the non-integral, bonded corner, comprises an elongate inner sidewall that terminates at the non-integral, bonded corner so that the non-integral, bonded corner does not comprise a stabilizing flap that integrally extends from the elongate inner sidewall of the first frame portion so as to be in inward, substantially coplanar overlapping relation with the corner-proximate bonding area of the elongate inner sidewall of the second, neighboring frame portion (claim 1) is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art. Likewise, the concept of a method of making a portion of a frame for a framed air filter, the method comprising: folding first and second frame pieces to form first and second frame portions, each frame portion comprising an elongate inner sidewall and an elongate outer sidewall that meet at a sidewall junction, an elongate upstream flange that meets the elongate outer sidewall at an outer junction, and an elongate downstream flange that meets the elongate inner sidewall at an inner junction; mounting the first and second frame portions on first and second edges of a sheet of filter media so that an end of the first frame portion and an end of the second frame portion meet to define a corner of the frame; positioning a reinforcing plate that integrally extends from an end of an elongate downstream flange of the first frame portion and is foldably connected thereto by a fold line, so that the reinforcing plate is in inward, substantially coplanar overlapping relation with at least a corner-proximate bonding area of the elongate inner sidewall of the second frame portion ; and, affixing the reinforcing plate to the corner-proximate bonding area (claim 16) is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art. The closest prior art is Lise et al. ( US 8,702,829 B2 ), which discloses a nestable (col. 9, line 29) a ir filter 1 that may be rectangular in shape with corners 4, with filter media 5 thus having a generally rectangular perimeter 6 with a frame with four major elongate frame portions that are each mounted on one of the four major edges of the filter media and with neighboring frame portions meeting to form corners 11 (Fig. 1; col. 2, lines 53-62) with a downstream flange 60 and an upstream flange 30, and an outer sidewall 40 and an inner sidewall 50 being foldably connected by fold line 45 (i.e., a sidewall junction ) (Fig. 3; col. 3, lines 5, 17-18). However, Lise does not suggest a reinforcing plate that integrally extends from the downstream flange is foldably connected thereto by a fold line, so that the reinforcing plate is in inward, substantially coplanar overlapping relation with at least a corner-proximate bonding area of the elongate inner sidewall of a second frame portion . Claims 9 and 14-15 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT GABRIEL E GITMAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7934 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-Th 7:15-5:45pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT In Suk Bullock can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3471 . 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. /GABRIEL E GITMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772