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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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 5, 10, 15 and 20 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.
(a) Claim 5 currently recites a physical removable layer that comprises a plurality of “digital numbers”; and claim 15 recites that a physical nail is marked by a corresponding “digital number” on a physical removable layer.
However, given the fact that the terms “digital number” and “digital numbers” are typically used when referring to a number(s) displayed via a computer display/interface, each corresponding term above renders the corresponding claim ambiguous since it is unclear whether the recited term is referring to a number displayed via a computer interface or a number written on a physical surface (e.g., consider making the following amendments in order to resolve the ambiguity above: --
(b) Each of claims 10 and 20 recites, “the server: receives the image comprising a plurality of pixels from the string art application . . . aligns the image with the plurality of nails; selects an initial nail from the plurality of nails . . . designates the second nail as the initial nail” (emphasis added).
However, it is unclear how the server is aligning the image, which may be displayed via the electronic device, with the physical nails that are on the physical canvas. In particular, since it is already unclear what image is being implied per the term “the image”, it is further unclear whether the terms “nails” and “nail”, as recited per each of claims 10 and 20, are referring to image of nails (e.g., a picture) that represent the physical nails on the canvas.
Prior Art
3. Considering each of claims 1 and 11 as a whole (including their respective dependent claims), the prior art does not teach or suggest the claims as currently presented.
(a) Schroder (US 2022/0391436) is one of the references relevant to the current claim. Schroder teaches a system/method that generates, based on the analysis of a captured image data, a set of instructions that allows a user to create a desired string art; such as, informing the user about one or more string paths that he/she is required to traverse; informing the user about the sequence and/or number of string windings that he/she is required to make on one or more of the pins, etc. ([0030]; [0031]; [0035]; [0036]; [0039]; [0044], etc.).
Schroder also teaches one or more physical objects—such as, a physical loom, a template, etc. ([0091]; [0093]; [0099]), which allow the user to create the string art based on the set of instructions—such as audio and/or visual guidance—that the system is providing to the user ([0116] to [0120]).
However, Schroder fails to teach or suggest the structural features currently claimed, which includes: the container that can be folded into a string kit stand; and wherein the stand incorporates a rigid backing on which (i) a canvas is detachably mounted; (ii) plurality of canvas holders are placed, and (iii) a thread holder is mounted, etc.
(b) Smith (US 11,401,634) is also a reference relevant to the current claims. Smith teaches an apparatus that allows a user to create a string art (see the abstract); wherein the apparatus can have one or more desired geometrical shapes (e.g., a semi-circle structure, a spherical structure, etc.); and wherein the include multiple pegs that are installed around its perimeter (e.g., see label “107” per FIG 1B; label “205” per FIG 2B, etc.); and thereby, the apparatus allows a user to create a desired string art based on instructions, namely one or more markings (e.g., numbers, letters, signs), which are placed on the pegs in order to guide the user how to maneuver a string from one pin to another, etc. (e.g., see col.5, lines 49-54; col.6, lines 32-39).
However, Smith also fails to teach or suggest the claimed structural features identified above; namely, the container that can be folded into a string kit stand; and wherein the stand incorporates a rigid backing on which (i) a canvas is detachably mounted; (ii) plurality of canvas holders are placed, and (iii) a thread holder is mounted, etc.
Of course, besides failing to teach/suggest the structural features above, Smith also fails to teach or suggest the claimed string art application, which generates instructions (e.g., the series of directions) based on converting an image; such as, an image that corresponds to the art to be created.
(c) Dholakiya (US 2020/0060395) is also additional references that relate to string art. Dholakiya implements a base structure that may have one or more shapes (see FIG 3, label “12”; FIG 4, label “31”; FIG 5, label “41”), including plurality of posts (see FIG 1, label “22”) that are arranged around the perimeter of the base structure; and thereby, a string art is formed by crisscrossing wires or strings between the posts according to one or more arrangements in order to obtain a jewelry with different looks and appearances ([0022]; [0025]).
However, Dholakiya also fails to teach or suggest the claimed structural features identified above; i.e., the container that can be folded into a string kit stand; and wherein the string stand incorporates a rigid backing on which (i) a canvas is detachably mounted; (ii) plurality of canvas holders are placed, and (iii) a thread holder is mounted, etc.
In addition, Dholakiya also fails to teach or suggest the claimed string art application, which generates instructions (e.g., the series of directions) based on converting an image that corresponds to the art to be formed.
(d) Chen (US 2020/0094615) is also a reference that is relevant to a string art. Although Chen implements a base structure (see FIG 1, label “10”), which allows the user to create a string art using at least one string ([0020]), Chen does not require the use of a plurality of pins/nails that may be arranged on the base structure ([0024]). Instead, unlike the current claims, Chen uses plurality of holes (FIG 1, label “12”) that are arranged on the surface of the base structure.
Accordingly, besides missing the claimed features that correspond to the implementation of nails, Chen also fails to teach or suggest the clamed features that correspond to the container that can be folded into a string kit stand; wherein the stand incorporates a rigid backing on which (i) a canvas is detachably mounted; (ii) plurality of canvas holders are placed, and (iii) a thread holder is mounted, etc.
Furthermore, also fails to teach or suggest the claimed string art application, which generates instructions (e.g., the series of directions) based on converting an image that corresponds to the art to be formed.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 and 16-19 contain allowable subject matter. However, each of claims 5, 10, 15 and 20 is required to be amended in order to correct the deficiencies noted under section §112(b). Accordingly, Applicant may present the allowed claims separately.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUK A GEBREMICHAEL whose telephone number is (571) 270-3079. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00AM-3:00PM.
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 LEWIS can be reached on (571) 272-7673. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRUK A GEBREMICHAEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715