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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The subject matter which was not described in the specification is that a base of each of the four triangular segments is mated in a respective channel defined longitudinally into the distal end of the elongated cylinder. The original specification does not mention any channels. Further, the figures show that the tip could include channels to allow mating with the pier segment such that the pier segment does not require channels as now claimed. Thus, it is not clear that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed.
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 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the longitudinal axis” in line 24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder of the first pier segment is previously recited, but not a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder of the second pier segment which is being referenced in this limitation. Claims 2-12 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the longitudinal axis” in lines 23-24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder of the first pier segment is previously recited, but not a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder of the second pier segment which is being referenced in this limitation. Claims 14-17 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the proximal end” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that a proximal end portion is previously recited, but not a proximal end. Examiner further notes that the terms “proximal end” and “proximal end portion” appear to be used interchangeably throughout the claim. Further, it is unclear whether “a longitudinal axis” in lines 15-16 is the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a longitudinal axis” in line 6 because of the double positive recitation of “a longitudinal axis”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a longitudinal axis” to mean “the longitudinal axis”. Claims 19 and 20 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 18-20 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stroyer (US 2018/0030681) alone.
Regarding claim 18, Stroyer discloses a method of joining a first helical pier segment to a second helical pier segment, the method comprising: driving a first helical pier segment (e.g. 2808, Fig. 26C, similar to 2202, Fig. 19) partially into the earth such that at least a proximal end portion thereof is exposed (e.g. similar to paragraph 0057, wherein the first helical pier segment is torqued into the earth and must therefore be partially driven into the earth with an exposed proximal end portion at some point during the driving step), wherein the proximal end of the first helical pier segment defines a surface (e.g. horizontal surface of 2808, Fig. 26C), the majority of said surface being oriented perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the first helical pier segment (e.g. Fig. 26C); attaching a coupler (e.g. similar to 2300, Fig. 19, paragraph 0060) to a distal end of a second helical pier segment (e.g. 2804, Fig. 26C, similar to 2214, Fig. 19), wherein the distal end of the second helical pier segment defines a surface (e.g. horizontal surface of 2804, Fig. 26C), the majority of said surface being oriented perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the second helical pier segment (e.g. Fig. 26C); inserting at least a portion of the proximal end portion of the first helical pier segment into a distal recess defined in the coupler until the proximal end of the first helical pier segment abuts the distal end of the second helical pier segment (e.g. similar to Fig. 19, paragraph 0060); and rotating the second helical pier segment relative to the first helical pier segment about a longitudinal axis of the first helical pier segment until a stop surface (e.g. left side of 2812, Fig. 26C) defined in a helical projection defined in the distal end of the second helical pier segment (e.g. 2812, Fig. 26C) abuts a stop surface (e.g. left side of 2816, Fig. 26C) defined in a helical notch defined in the proximal end of the first helical pier segment (e.g. 2816, Fig. 26C, paragraph 0058 wherein the helical shape of the projection and notch will force the second helical pier segment to rotate during mating of the fitting).
Regarding claim 19, Stroyer further discloses that the step of rotating the second helical pier segment relative to the first helical pier segment until the respective stop surfaces abut one another aligns a first bolt hole defined laterally through the proximal end portion of the first helical pier segment (e.g. similar to upper 2216, Fig.’s 18 and 19) with a first bolt hole defined laterally through the coupler (e.g. similar to upper 2302, Fig. 19) to allow for a first bolt to be simultaneously passed through both of the respective bolt holes (e.g. paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 20, Stroyer further discloses that the step of rotating the second helical pier segment relative to the first helical pier segment until the respective stop surfaces abut one another aligns a plurality of bolt holes defined laterally through the proximal end portion of the first helical pier segment (e.g. similar to 2216, Fig.’s 18 and 19) with a plurality of bolt holes defined laterally through the coupler (e.g. similar to 2302, Fig. 19) to allow for a respective bolt to be simultaneously passed through each of the respective plurality of bolt holes (e.g. paragraph 0060).
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 1-6 and 10-17 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stroyer (US 2018/0030681) in view of Xing et al (CN 110984148).
Regarding claim 1, Stroyer discloses a helical pier system (e.g. 2200, Fig.’s 18-20), comprising: a first pier segment (e.g. 2202, Fig.’s 18 and 19), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2206, Fig. 18) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2208, Fig. 18), the proximal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig. 18); a first bolt hole extending laterally through the elongated cylinder adjacent to the proximal longitudinal end thereof (e.g. upper 2216, Fig. 18); and a notch defined distally inward from the proximal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 2211, Fig. 18), wherein the notch extends until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. either side of 2211, Fig. 18), wherein the stop surface of the first pier segment is oriented parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 18), and wherein a majority of the surface of the proximal longitudinal end is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig.’s 18 and 20); a second pier segment (e.g. 2214, Fig.’s 18 and 19), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2217, Fig. 18) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 2214, Fig. 18), the distal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig. 18); a projection extending distally outward from the distal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 2213, Fig. 18), wherein the projection extends until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. either side of 2213, Fig. 18), wherein the stop surface of the second pier segment is oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 18), and wherein a majority of the surface of the distal longitudinal end is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig.’s 18 and 20); and a coupler secured to the distal longitudinal end of the second pier segment (e.g. 2300, Fig. 19), the coupler comprising a hollow cylinder with a first bolt hole defined laterally through a sidewall thereof (e.g. upper 2302, Fig. 19, paragraph 0060), and the coupler protruding distally beyond the distal longitudinal end of the second pier segment to define a female recess with an inner diameter sized to receive the proximal longitudinal end of the first pier segment (e.g. Fig. 19, paragraph 0060), wherein the notch of the first pier segment and the projection of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another such that when the second pier segment is rotated with respect to the first pier segment that the respective stop surfaces abut one another when the first bolt hole of the first pier segment is aligned with the first bolt hole of the coupler to allow for a first bolt to be inserted simultaneously through the aligned respective first bolt holes (e.g. Fig. 19, paragraph 0060). Stroyer further discloses that various notches and projections can be provided (e.g. paragraph 0058) but does not explicitly disclose that the notch is a helical notch that tapers inward from the proximal longitudinal end and the projection is a helical projection that tapers outward from the distal longitudinal end. Xing teaches a helical pier system (e.g. 6, Fig. 1, paragraph 0010), comprising: a first pier segment (e.g. 62, Fig. 1), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. lower end of 62, Fig. 1) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 62, Fig. 1), the proximal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig.’s 1 and 4); and a helical notch defined distally inward from the proximal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 10, Fig. 4), wherein the helical notch tapers inward from the proximal longitudinal end until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. vertical surface of 10, Fig. 4), wherein the stop surface of the first pier segment is oriented parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 4); a second pier segment (e.g. 61, Fig. 1), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. lower end of 61, Fig. 1) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 61, Fig. 1), the distal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig.’s 1 and 4); a helical projection extending distally outward from the distal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 9, Fig. 4), wherein the helical projection tapers outward from the distal longitudinal end until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. vertical surface of 9, Fig. 4), wherein the stop surface of the second pier segment is oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 4); wherein the helical notch of the first pier segment and the helical projection of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0039). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the notches and projections of Stroyer with a tapered helical shape as taught by Xing because a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the helical notch of the first pier segment and the helical projection of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another such that less than one complete rotation of the second pier segment with respect to the first pier segment is required to cause the respective stop surfaces to abut one another (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 18, and Xing, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the stop surface of the first pier segment is rotationally clocked offset from a center of the bolt hole of the first pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 18) but does not explicitly disclose that the offset is 90 degrees. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to offset the stop surface of the first pier segment and the center of the bolt hole by 90 degrees for the expected benefit of maximizing the distance between the stop surface and the bolt hole which are both areas of higher stress.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the elongated cylinder of the first pier segment is hollow and the elongated cylinder of the second pier segment is hollow (e.g. Stroyer, paragraph 0057, and Xing, paragraph 0013) but does not explicitly disclose that the pier segments are hollow through their entire longitudinal extents. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the pier segments of the combination of Stroyer and Xing hollow through their entire longitudinal extents for the expected benefit of avoiding unnecessary material which would increase cost and weight.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Stroyer and Xing does not disclose that the proximal end of the second pier segment comprises a helical notch having the same configuration as the helical notch of the proximal end of the first pier segment. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the proximal end of the second pier segment of the combination of Stroyer and Xing with a helical notch for the expected benefit of allowing additional extension pier segments to be added to the pier system.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the distal end of the first helical segment comprises a penetrating tip (e.g. Stroyer, 2204, Fig. 18, paragraph 0058, and Xing, 63, Fig. 1, paragraph 0010).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the helical projection of the distal end of the second pier segment consumes about ¼ to 1/3 of the surface of the distal end of the second pier segment with a remainder of the surface being perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the second pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig.’s 18 and 20).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the helical notch of the proximal end of the first pier segment consumes about ¼ to 1/3 of the surface of the proximal end of the first pier segment with a remainder of the surface being perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the first pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig.’s 18 and 20).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the first pier segment further comprises a second bolt hole extending laterally through the elongated cylinder adjacent to the proximal longitudinal end thereof (e.g. Stroyer, lower 2216, Fig. 18), wherein the second bolt hole is longitudinally offset from the first bolt hole (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 18), wherein the coupler further comprises a second bolt hole defined laterally through the sidewall thereof (e.g. Stroyer, lower 2302, Fig. 19), and wherein when the respective stop surfaces abut one another the second bolt hole of the first pier segment is aligned with the second bolt hole of the coupler to allow for a second bolt to be inserted simultaneously through the aligned respective second bolt holes (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 19, paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 13, Stroyer discloses a helical pier system (e.g. 2200, Fig.’s 18-20), comprising: a first pier segment (e.g. 2214, Fig.’s 18 and 19), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 2214, Fig. 18) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2217, Fig. 18), the proximal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig. 18); and a projection defined outward from the proximal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 2213, Fig. 18), wherein the projection extends until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. either side of 2213, Fig. 18), wherein the stop surface of the first pier segment is oriented parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 18), and wherein a majority of the surface of the proximal longitudinal end is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 18); a second pier segment (e.g. 2202, Fig.’s 18 and 19), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2208, Fig. 18) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. 2206, Fig. 18), the distal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig. 18); a first bolt hole extending laterally through the elongated cylinder adjacent to the distal longitudinal end thereof (e.g. upper 2216, Fig. 18); and a notch defined inward from the distal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 2211, Fig. 18), wherein the notch extends until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. either side of 2211, Fig. 18), wherein the stop surface of the second pier segment is oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 18), and wherein a majority of the surface of the distal longitudinal end is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig.’s 18 and 20); and a coupler secured to the proximal longitudinal end of the first pier segment (e.g. 2300, Fig. 19), the coupler comprising a hollow cylinder with a first bolt hole defined laterally through a sidewall thereof (e.g. upper 2302, Fig. 19, paragraph 0060), and the coupler protruding proximally beyond the proximal longitudinal end of the first pier segment to define a female recess with an inner diameter sized to receive the distal longitudinal end of the second pier segment (e.g. Fig. 19, paragraph 0060), wherein the projection of the first pier segment and the notch of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another such that when the second pier segment is rotated with respect to the first pier segment that the respective stop surfaces abut one another when the first bolt hole of the second pier segment is aligned with the first bolt hole of the coupler to allow for a first bolt to be inserted simultaneously through the aligned respective first bolt holes (e.g. Fig. 19, paragraph 0060). Stroyer further discloses that various notches and projections can be provided (e.g. paragraph 0058) but does not explicitly disclose that the projection is a helical notch that tapers inward from the proximal longitudinal end and the notch is a helical projection that tapers outward from the distal longitudinal end. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to rearrange the notches and projections of Stroyer such that the notches are included on the first pier segment and the projections are included on the second pier segment because it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. Xing teaches a helical pier system (e.g. 6, Fig. 1, paragraph 0010), comprising: a first pier segment (e.g. 62, Fig. 1), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. lower end of 62, Fig. 1) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 62, Fig. 1), the proximal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig.’s 1 and 4); and a helical notch defined distally inward from the proximal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 10, Fig. 4), wherein the helical notch tapers inward from the proximal longitudinal end until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. Fig. 4), wherein the stop surface of the first pier segment is oriented parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 4); a second pier segment (e.g. 61, Fig. 1), comprising: an elongated cylinder having a distal longitudinal end (e.g. lower end of 61, Fig. 1) and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. upper end of 61, Fig. 1), the distal longitudinal end defining a surface (e.g. Fig.’s 1 and 4); and a helical projection defined outward from the distal longitudinal end of the elongated cylinder (e.g. 9, Fig. 4), wherein the helical projection tapers outward from the distal longitudinal end until it terminates in a stop surface (e.g. vertical surface of 9, Fig. 4), wherein the stop surface of the second pier segment is oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the elongated cylinder (e.g. Fig. 4); wherein the helical notch of the first pier segment and the helical projection of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another (e.g. Fig. 4, paragraph 0039). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the notches and projections of Stroyer with a tapered helical shape as taught by Xing because a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the helical projection of the distal end of the second pier segment consumes about ¼ to 1/3 of the surface of the distal end of the second pier segment with a remainder of the surface being perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the second pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig.’s 18 and 20); and wherein the helical notch of the proximal end of the first pier segment consumes about ¼ to 1/3 of the surface of the proximal end of the first pier segment with a remainder of the surface being perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the first pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig.’s 18 and 20).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the helical notch of the first pier segment and the helical projection of the second pier segment are configured to mate with one another such that less than one complete rotation of the second pier segment with respect to the first pier segment is required to cause the respective stop surfaces to abut one another (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 18, and Xing, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the stop surface of the first pier segment is rotationally clocked offset from a center of the bolt hole of the second pier segment (e.g. Stroyer, Fig. 18) but does not explicitly disclose that the offset is 90 degrees. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to offset the stop surface of the first pier segment and the center of the bolt hole by 90 degrees for the expected benefit of maximizing the distance between the stop surface and the bolt hole which are both areas of higher stress.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Stroyer and Xing further discloses that the elongated cylinder of the first pier segment is hollow and the elongated cylinder of the second pier segment is hollow (e.g. Stroyer, paragraph 0057, and Xing, paragraph 0013) but does not explicitly disclose that the pier segments are hollow through their entire longitudinal extents. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the pier segments of the combination of Stroyer and Xing hollow through their entire longitudinal extents for the expected benefit of avoiding unnecessary material which would increase cost and weight.
Claims 8 and 9 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stroyer (US 2018/0030681) and Xing et al (CN 110984148) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Queen et al (US 2021/0131055).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Stroyer and Xing discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that the first helical segment comprises a flight disposed about the elongated cylinder between the proximal and distal longitudinal ends thereof (e.g. Stroyer, 2204, Fig. 18) but does not explicitly disclose that the flight is a seashell flight. Queen teaches a helical pier system (e.g. 600, Fig. GA), comprising: a first pier segment (e.g. Fig. 6G, similar to 601, Fig. 6D), comprising: an elongated shaft having a distal longitudinal end and a proximal longitudinal end opposite the distal longitudinal end (e.g. 614, Fig. 6G); wherein the first helical segment comprises a seashell flight disposed about the elongated shaft between the proximal and distal longitudinal ends thereof (e.g. 612a, Fig.’s 6F and 6G, paragraph 0060). It would have been obvious toa person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a seashell flight as taught by Queen for the flight of the combination of Stroyer and Xing because such is a known flight in the art that would provide the expected benefit of facilitating cutting into the shaft (e.g. Queen, paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Stroyer, Xing and Queen further discloses that the seashell flight defines a spiral body that terminates in a tapered leading edge (e.g. Queen, Fig. 6F).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/S.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678