DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement has been received and considered.
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 1-6 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 it is unclear whether applicants are claiming a method of calculating a cell wall thickness gradient of a shock absorbing member having a honeycomb structure or the shock absorbing member comprising a molded part with a honeycomb structure. The preamble of the claim indicates that the structure of the device is to be claimed whereas the ‘procedure steps’ indicate a method is to be claimed. This is confusing since the limitations cross different statutory classes of invention and therefore becomes unclear which class of invention applicant’s are looking to patent.
Further the limitations “[method of calculating a cell wall thickness gradient]” on lines 6 and 10 are confusing since 1) limitations in parenthesis are considered as having no effect on the scope of the claims and 2) it appears from MPEP guidelines on amending the claims that these limitations are to be deleted.
Also if the method of calculating a cell wall thickness gradient is to be claimed the limitations “procedure 1).. procedure 4)” etc. should be replaced with “steps” (I.e. step 1, step 2 etc.).
Lastly it appears the expression “(G)” should come at the end of the claim not the middle of it.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 (as best understood) appear to 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7123. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 A.M.-7:00P.M..
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, Rob Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
1/22/26