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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The examiner notes that the references to the figures and claims in the Abstract is improper.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the drawings filed on 05/24/2024 are faint illustrations. The examiner notes that the drawings must be clear and legible. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
INFORMATION ON HOW TO EFFECT DRAWING CHANGES
Replacement Drawing Sheets
Drawing changes must be made by presenting replacement sheets which incorporate the desired changes and which comply with 37 CFR 1.84. An explanation of the changes made must be presented either in the drawing amendments section, or remarks, section of the amendment paper. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). A replacement sheet must include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of the amended drawing(s) must not be labeled as “amended.” If the changes to the drawing figure(s) are not accepted by the examiner, applicant will be notified of any required corrective action in the next Office action. No further drawing submission will be required, unless applicant is notified.
Identifying indicia, if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet and within the top margin.
Annotated Drawing Sheets
A marked-up copy of any amended drawing figure, including annotations indicating the changes made, may be submitted or required by the examiner. The annotated drawing sheet(s) must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheet” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings.
Timing of Corrections
Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application.
If corrected drawings are required in a Notice of Allowability (PTOL-37), the new drawings MUST be filed within the THREE MONTH shortened statutory period set for reply in the “Notice of Allowability.” Extensions of time may NOT be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 for filing the corrected drawings after the mailing of a Notice of Allowability.
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 1-3 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. The examiner also notes that claims do not require references to figures or reference numbers within the drawings, and a claim should be constructed in a single sentence with a single terminating period. Additionally, the examiner notes that the claims 2-3 are written as independent claims.
Claims 1-3 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.
Claims 1-3 cite figures within the claims, rendering claims 1-3 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the front removable storage pocket(s)” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 1 the phrase "which can be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 1 recites the limitation “internal, customized, item storage compartments” in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “side zippers” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “entire perimeter” in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “each half of the front storage compartment” in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(side and top)” in lines 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “middle zipper” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “internal, removable storage compartments” in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “shelving” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “PBL” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “The eyelet twist lock clasps (or facsimile), internal hook, loop fastener system and internal barrier of mesh, nylon (or facsimile)” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the internal storage compartments” in lines 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “PBL” in lines 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “storage compartments” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “stored items” in lines 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mangano (US 20080083592 A1).
The examiner notes that the claim requirement of “which can be one perimeter zipper, or include a 3-zipper configuration”, requires that only the features of one of the claimed configurations needs be met.
PNG
media_image1.png
684
535
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, Mangano teaches a PBL (100) can be constructed by utilizing various zipper configurations on the front removable storage pocket (110) which can be one perimeter zipper (2 in Annotated Figure 2 below) or include a 3-zipper configuration allowing the user maximum and optimal item: storage, access, and retrieval efficiency with the ability to independently unsecure and remove internal, customized , item storage compartments from the rest of the PBL, comprised of: Side zippers A and B that unzip and zip up the entire perimeter (side and top) of each half of the front storage compartment; Middle zipper C that divides the front storage compartment into two equal halves; Internal, removeable storage compartments that securely affix to the PBL but can also be removed independently from the PBL allowing efficient storage and retrieval of items. (Figs. 1-17; [0024]-[0027])
PNG
media_image2.png
29
22
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
21
163
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Custom internal storage compartment shelving (160) allows users to create various customized internal PBL (100) storage configurations and sizes for stored items. (Wherein Mangano teaches “Each shelf 1410 may be independently configurable. That is, it may be desirable to fold only some of the shelves against the interior surface of the main housing, while positioning one or more shelves in an expanded position.”) (Figs. 1-17; [0037]-[0039])
Regarding Claim 3, The eyelet twist lock clasps (or facsimile), internal hook, loop fastener system (1450) and internal barrier of mesh, nylon (or facsimile) applications allow the user to securely affix the internal storage compartments (172) to the interior of the PBL so that the storage compartments and stored items remain secure and move little, if at all, during transit. (Wherein Mangano teaches “the fasteners 123 may be secured to or around the rigid member 121. Such a configuration may prevent undesired movement of the support and/or allow for variable placement of the rigid member 121. For example, the fasteners 123 may comprise straps of cloth, nylon, or other material, with Velcro® attached to a surface of each strap.”) (Figs. 1-17; [0032], [0035])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Behrend et al. (US 20200178664 A1), teaches an adjustable storage bag.
Jaworski et al. (US 20200037719 A1), teaches a luggage system.
Shyr (US 20180168306 A1), teaches an adjustable luggage system.
Weber (US D666816 S), teaches a suitcase with drawers.
Eardley et al. (US 20070089954 A1), teaches a suitcase with drawers.
Peterson (US 6595604 B1), teaches a tray support system for a bag.
McIntyre (US 20050098403 A1), teaches a reconfigurable travel trunk.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R CAUDILL whose telephone number is (303)297-4349. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30-5:30 MT.
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, NATHAN JENNESS can be reached on (571) 270-5055. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/JUSTIN CAUDILL/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/DON M ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733