DETAILED ACTION
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
The claims listed below are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, line 1, change “Storage water heater” to -- A storage water heater --
In Claim 1, line 7, insert -- is -- at the beginning of the line and change “a second auxiliary heating device” to -- an auxiliary heating device --
In Claim 1, line 10, change “the water flow” to -- water flow -- and change “it” to -- the water flow --
In Claim 1, line 11, change “the said tank to -- said tank --, change “the outlet section” to -- an outlet section -- and change “the said inlet” to -- said inlet --
In Claim 1, line 13, change “of the said tank” to -- of said tank” and change “the make-up water” to -- make-up water --
In Claim 1, the last line, change “obtained/placed” to -- placed -- (or equivalent)
Note that all dependent claims are replete with similar grammatical issues to those of Claim 1 (presented above) that also require revision. Ensure that, inter alia, proper antecedent basis is provided for each claim term. Furthermore, in each dependent claim, insert “The” at the beginning of each claim. Furthermore, in Claim 22, delete “and differs in that” and re-word the claim to state exactly which claim elements and method steps the claim itself comprises.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a control and management unit capable of controlling said at least a heating device” (Claim 1)
“means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” (Claim 12)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Regarding “a control and management unit capable of controlling said at least a heating device” (from Claim 1): The specification fails to provide any structure for the claimed “unit”. It is consequently unclear what structural elements the claimed “unit” comprises or does not comprise to perform the claimed function of “control and management” and “controlling said at least a heating device” which warrants a 112(b) rejection for Claim 1 (as is presented below in this Office Action). For the purpose of expediting prosecution, “a control and management unit capable of controlling said at least a heating device” (from Claim 1) will be interpreted as any unit that can perform or contribute to performing the function of “control and management” and “controlling said at least a heating device”.
Regarding “means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” (from Claim 12): The specification fails to provide any structure for the claimed “means”. It is consequently unclear what structural elements the claimed “means” comprises or does not comprise to perform the claimed function of using “solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” which warrants a 112(b) rejection for Claim 12 (as is presented below in this Office Action). For the purpose of expediting prosecution, “means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” (from Claim 1) will be interpreted as any element, or combination of elements, that can perform or contribute to performing the function of using “solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like”.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-22 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 establishes a “Storage water heater comprising at least a heating device” and proceeds to claim “at least two heating devices, of which at least a main heating device and at least a second auxiliary heating device adapted to act as a pre-heater”. It is unclear if the “at least two heating devices” include the previously established “heating device” or if this limitation is establishing two additional and distinct heating devices to “the heating device” already established. Note that the specification fails to clarify this issue. The metes and bounds of Claim 1 are consequently unclear.
Furthermore, Claim 1 establishes “a control and management unit capable of controlling said at least a heating device” which has invoked 112(f) (as is presented above in this Office Action). The specification fails to provide any structure for the claimed “unit”. It is consequently unclear what structural elements the claimed “unit” comprises or does not comprise to perform the claimed function of “control and management” and “controlling said at least a heating device” which makes the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. For the purpose of expediting prosecution, “a control and management unit capable of controlling said at least a heating device” (from Claim 1) will be interpreted as any unit that can perform or contribute to performing the function of “control and management” and “controlling said at least a heating device”.
Claims 2-22 are rejected due to their dependency on Claim 1.
Claim 12 establishes “means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” which has invoked 112(f) (as is presented above in this Office Action). The specification fails to provide any structure for the claimed “means”. It is consequently unclear what structural elements the claimed “means” comprises or does not comprise to perform the claimed function of using “the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” which makes the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. For the purpose of expediting prosecution, “means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like” (from Claim 1) will be interpreted as any element, or combination of elements, that can perform or contribute to performing the function of using “solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “said management method being aimed at controlling/coordinating different components of the said water heater such as at least the different heating devices of the said water heater, both said at least a main device and one or more of said auxiliary devices and/or at least said diverter means” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if “being aimed at” is intended to mean that the management method actually achieves the proceeding limitations, attempts to achieve the proceeding limitations, or something else altogether. Furthermore, it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “such as” are actually required by the claim or not. Note that the specification fails to clarify this issue. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function and is provided with only said pre-heater, placed along said inlet duct, and a diverter means of the on/off type” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not. Furthermore, it is unclear what is meant by “is provided with only said pre-heater, placed along said inlet duct, and a diverter means of the on/off type” since several other elements other than those cited have already been established within the claim. Thus, it is unclear if/how “provided with only” excludes other elements and limits the claim. Furthermore, Claim 17 recites the limitation “if Tm is lower than Tset, the next phase is provided” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear what “the next phase” is/entails and how it is to be carried out within the claimed method. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function and is provided with only said pre-heater, placed along said inlet duct, and with a diverter means of the on/off type” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not. Furthermore, it is unclear what is meant by “is provided with only said pre-heater, placed along said inlet duct, and with a diverter means of the on/off type” since several other elements other than those cited have already been established within the claim. Thus, it is unclear if/how “provided with only” excludes other elements and limits the claim. Furthermore, Claim 18 recites the limitation “if Tm is lower than Tset, the next phase is provided” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear what “the next phase” is/entails and how it is to be carried out within the claimed method. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not. Furthermore, Claim 19 recites the limitation “if Tm is lower than Tset, the next phase is provided” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear what “the next phase” is/entails and how it is to be carried out within the claimed method. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not. Furthermore, Claim 20 recites the limitation “if Tm is lower than Tset, the next phase is provided” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear what “the next phase” is/entails and how it is to be carried out within the claimed method. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “wherein said water heater may be equipped with at least said BOOST function” which is considered indefinite because it is unclear if the limitations proceeding “may be” are actually required by the claim or not and because the “BOOST”. Note that the specification fails to clarify these issues. The metes and bounds of the claim are consequently unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shtilerman (US 2020/0072502 A1) in view of Wang et al. (CN 207365171 U) (hereinafter “Wang”) (see attached original document and translation for reference).
Regarding Claim 1, to the extent that Claim 1 is understood in light of the 112(b) rejections set forth in this Office Action, Shtilerman teaches of a storage water heater (Fig. 2A) comprising at least a heating device (heating device comprising element (34)) (see at least [0071], [0074] and Fig. 2A), at least a storage tank (24) wherein water is stored and heated (see at least [0074] and Fig. 2A), at least a control and management unit (“controller 36”) capable of controlling said at least a heating device (see at least [0073], [0076]-[0077] and Fig. 2A), at least an inlet duct (26b) through which water may be introduced into said tank (see at least [0073]-[0074], [0079] and Fig. 2A and note that each of ducts 26a-26c can selectively be used, via control and management unit (36), as an inlet duct or outlet duct for tank (24) and thus duct (26b) may be configured to be an inlet duct as claimed wherein water may be introduced into said tank), at least an outlet duct (26c) through which water may be sent/withdrawn from the said tank (see at least [0073]-[0074], [0079] and Fig. 2A and note that each of ducts 26a-26c can selectively be used, via control and management unit (36), as an inlet duct or outlet duct for tank (24) and thus duct (26c) may be configured to be an outlet duct as claimed through which water may be sent/withdrawn from the said tank),
wherein the storage the heating device (34) is adapted to act as a pre-heater (see at least [0071], [0074] and Fig. 2A and note that heating device (34) may preheat water upstream of the tank as shown in Fig. 2A),
wherein said water heater comprises at least a by-pass duct (by-pass duct comprising the duct of element (38) as shown in Fig. 2A, duct (26d) and corresponding conduits (40)) capable of deviating, entirely or partially, water flow entering said tank so as to guide and convey the water flow in a zone of said tank (the zone of the outlet of element (26d) as shown in Fig. 2A) placed at a height higher than the outlet section of the said inlet duct (26b)) (as shown in Fig. 2A, the zone of the outlet of element (26d) is positioned higher than inlet duct (26b)), said by-pass duct extending between the inlet duct to which it is connected, and the zone of the said tank wherein it discharges/introduces the make-up water (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A), said by-pass duct being shaped so as to comprise:
at least an inlet (inlet of (40) and/or duct of element (38)) connected to said inlet duct (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A);
at least an outlet (26d) arranged inside said tank (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A);
said by-pass duct providing for at least an outlet portion (top portion of element (26d) as shown in Fig. 2A) that develops and is housed inside said tank (as is shown in Fig. 2A) and whereon said at least an outlet is obtained/placed (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Shtilerman fails to explicitly teach that the storage water heater comprises at least two heating devices, wherein one of the heating devices is (at least) a main heating device and the other heating device is (at least) an auxiliary heating device.
Wang discloses a relatable storage water heater system (Fig. 1) that comprises a tank (1) with multiple heating devices ((4-1), elements (18)) (see at least [0038], [0046], [0055] and Fig. 1). Wang teaches that one of the heating devices (18) is (at least) a main heating device (since it is an “electric heating device” that can be activated as needed) and that the other heating device is (at least) an auxiliary heating device (since it can use auxiliary “solar” energy) (see at least [0046], [0055] and Fig. 1). Wang teaches that providing multiple heating devices, wherein one element is a main heating device and another is an auxiliary heating device, provides the advantage of enabling any difference of temperature to be made up if at any point the demand for heat exceeds the capacity of the auxiliary heating device (see at least [0055] and Fig. 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus taught by Shtilerman to comprise at least two heating devices, wherein one of the heating devices is (at least) a main heating device and the other heating device is (at least) an auxiliary heating device as is taught by Wang. Doing so could have been facilitated by incorporating an additional heating device (analogous to that of element (18) taught by Wang) that would serve as the main heating device while the existing heating device (34) taught by Shtilerman would serve as the auxiliary heating device (or vice-versa) based on Wang’s teachings. Doing so would have enabled any difference of temperature to be made up upon the demand for heat exceeding the capacity of the auxiliary heating device. Note that such modification would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed as it is presently understood.
Regarding Claim 2, Shtilerman also teaches that said outlet portion (top portion of element (26d) as shown in Fig. 2A) is arranged vertically inside said tank and extends from a zone in the proximity of the bottom of the said tank to a median or upper zone of the same tank based on the longitudinal development thereof (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 3, Shtilerman also teaches that said by-pass duct is shaped so as to be able to provide for:
at least a first portion, arranged externally to said tank (at least the duct portion of element (38) as shown in Fig. 2A), whereon said inlet is obtained/placed (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A); and
at least a second portion (26d), arranged inside the tank (as is shown in Fig. 2A), adapted to define said outlet portion (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 4, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least an outlet of said by-pass duct (outlet of (26d)) is arranged between the outlet section of the said inlet duct (26b) and the inlet section of the said outlet duct (26c) (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 5, Shtilerman also teaches that said water heater is further provided with at least a diverter means (38) adapted to connect said by-pass duct to said inlet duct (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 6, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least a diverter means is of the electrically or mechanically controllable type (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 7, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least a diverter means is of the ON/OFF type, (“i.e. capable of being either only open or only closed”) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A)..
Regarding Claim 8, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least a diverter means (38) is of the adjustable type, (“i.e. registrable between the opening and closing position”) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 9, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least a pre-heater (34) is installed along said inlet duct and said inlet of the said by-pass duct is placed along said inlet duct, downstream of the said pre-heater (34) (as is shown in Fig. 2A) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 10, Shtilerman also teaches that said at least a pre-heater (34) is installed along said by-pass duct and said inlet of the said by-pass duct is placed along said inlet duct, upstream of the inlet of the said pre-heater (depending on the orientation of diverter means (38)) (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 11: In the combination of Shtilerman and Wang, said water heater would further comprise at least a third auxiliary heating device (upper element (18) as taught by Wang), installed along said outlet duct so as to act as a post-heater (see at least [0055] and Fig. 1 of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above). Thus, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Regarding Claim 12: In the combination of Shtilerman and Wang, said first main heating device (34) as taught by Shtilerman may comprise a heat pump or means that use the solar energy or the geothermal energy or the like (see at least [0071] and Fig. 2A of Shtilerman); and said second and third auxiliary heating device (elements (18) as taught by Wang) comprise heaters of the instantaneous type (“electric”) (see at least [0055] and Fig. 1 of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above). Thus, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Regarding Claim 13: In the combination of Shtilerman and Wang, second and third auxiliary heating devices (element (34) as taught by Shtilerman and/or element (4-1) as taught by Wang) and said at least a diverter means (element (38) taught by Shtilerman) are installed externally to said tank (see at least [0073]-[0074] and Fig. 2A of Shtilerman, [0046] and Fig. 1 of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above). Thus, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Regarding Claim 14, Shtilerman also teaches that said water heater is further provided with (at least) a first temperature sensor (46) arranged in the proximity of the top zone of the said tank (24) and capable of detecting the temperature of the storage water (see at least [0073], [0079] and Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 15: To the extent that Claim 15 is understood in light of the 112(b) rejections set forth in this Office Action, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang teach of a storage water heater according to claim 1 (as is provided above in the rejection for Claim 1) in addition to a management method for the same (see at least [0073] and Fig. 2A of Shtilerman) that comprises controlling/coordinating different components of the said water heater such as at least the different heating devices of the said water heater (via master “controller 36”) (see at least [0073] and Fig. 2A), both said at least a main device and one or more of said auxiliary devices and/or at least said diverter means (38) (see at least [0073] and Fig. 2A of Shtilerman and note that full control, including independent heater control, is also taught by Wang) wherein said management method implements one or more supplementary heating functions, by one or more of said auxiliary devices, of the water introduced and/or withdrawn from the storage (as is taught by Wang when the auxiliary and main heating device are active at the same time) (see at least [0055] of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above), where the activation of at least one or more of said additional functions depending on at least: the presence or not of a withdrawal and the control of at least the temperature of the water supplied (see at least [0055] of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above). Thus, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed as it is presently understood.
Regarding Claim 16, Wang also teaches that said supplementary functions comprise at least a BOOST function (function taught by Wang wherein the auxiliary and main heating device are active at the same time) (see at least [0055] of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above), which allows for an additional heating, with respect to that provided by said main heating device at least of the water entering into said water heater by at least said second auxiliary heating device (see at least [0055] of Wang and the rejection for Claim 1 above). Thus, the combination of Shtilerman and Wang would have necessarily resulted in the invention as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Dependent Claims 17-22 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.
Regarding dependent Claim 17: To the extent that Claim 17 is understood in light of the 112(b) rejections set forth in this Office Action, the combination of limitations claimed in Claim 17 is neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by any known prior art including that of the relied upon prior art combination of Shtilerman and Wang. Claim 17 specifies a combination of specific method steps including, inter alia, a “verification phase”, “BOOST function” adjustment and a “next phase”. In the prior art Shtilerman and Wang, no method steps or controller configuration is taught that comprises the combination of distinct method steps claimed in Claim 17 and no motivation would have existed to have intentionally reconfigured the functional configuration already taught by Shtilerman and Wang (or that of any other known prior art) into a configuration that comprises the totality of Claim 17. Therefore, the subject matter of Claim 17 is considered to be allowable over the known prior art. However, the exact claim scope of Claim 17 is unclear and Claim 17 consequently stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) (as is presented above in this Office Action). Therefore, Claim 17 is not in condition for allowance at this time.
Regarding dependent Claim 18-22: Dependent Claim 18-20 each comprise subject matter similar to that of Claim 17 and are consequently each considered to be allowable for at least the same reasons as Claim 17 (as are presented above). However, the exact claim scope of each of Claims 18-20 (in addition to dependent Claims 21-22) is unclear and Claims 18-22 consequently stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) (as is presented above in this Office Action). Therefore, Claims 18-20, in addition to dependent Claims 21-22 which depend upon Claim 19, are not in condition for allowance at this time.
Note that this indication of allowable subject matter is subject to change depending on any change in claim scope that may result from amendment (or otherwise).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art is considered relevant to this application in terms of structure and use:
Weigerstorfer (DE 20017569 U1) (see attached original document and translation for reference)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN W JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8523. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5:00 PM.
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, Steve McAllister can be reached at 571-272-6785. 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.
/BENJAMIN W JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 4/4/2026
/STEVEN B MCALLISTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762