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 .
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 1-7,9-12,14-17 and 19 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 recites the limitation of “the flow axis”, wherein it is unclear what “the flow axis” is referring to. Specifically, it is unclear as to what the exact relationship the “the flow axis” have with the “a flow axis” from “each of the plurality of venturi flow channels defines a flow axis”, since the term “the flow axis “ has not differentiated how the “the flow axis” are distinct from the recited “each of the plurality of venturi flow channels defines a flow axis” in the claim. Is the term “the flow axis” referring back to only one flow axis or all of the flow axes? Since the metes and bounds of the limitation cannot be ascertained, the limitation is indefinite and , the claim is rendered indefinite and determined to be an antecedent basis issue). For examination purposes, the phrase has been interpreted as -- each flow axis of the plurality of venturi flow channels -- for clarity..
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the flow axis ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation of “the flow axis”, wherein it is unclear what “the flow axis” is referring to. Specifically, it is unclear as to what the exact relationship the “the flow axis” have with the “a flow axis” from “each of the plurality of venturi flow channels defines a flow axis”, since the term “the flow axis “ has not differentiated how the “the flow axis” are distinct from the recited “each of the plurality of venturi flow channels defines a flow axis” in the claim. Is the term “the flow axis” referring back to only one flow axis or all of the flow axes? Since the metes and bounds of the limitation cannot be ascertained, the limitation is indefinite and , the claim is rendered indefinite and determined to be an antecedent basis issue). For examination purposes, the phrase has been interpreted as -- each flow axis of the plurality of venturi flow channels -- for clarity..
Claim 15 recites the limitation " the flow axis ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency from a claim that has been rejected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7, 9-12, 14-17 and 19 would 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 11596088 B2.
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 GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F PST.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/GORDON A JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights