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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN 202111049871.9, filed on 8 September 2021.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
Fluid supply device
Upper housing of the cavity
Top end portion of the moving ring
Driving device
Cooling system
Upper end surface of the upper housing
Outer side surface of the moving ring
Two inner side surfaces
Bottom surface
Distance between the two inner side surfaces getting smaller and smaller
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should 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 an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 – 10 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the preamble of the claim recites “a vibration table based on fluid cooling”. It is unclear how the vibration table is “based on fluid cooling”, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 1, the claim recites “wherein a cavity and a moving ring are comprised”. It is unclear as to what element of the claim comprises the cavity and mobbing ring, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 1, the claim recites “the moving ring is provided in the cavity” A claim, although clear on its face, may also be indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty. See MPEP 2173.03. The drawings illustrate the moving ring (12) as not being provided in the cavity (11) (Figure 2). As such, the claim language conflicts with the specification and renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure makes the claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty.
Regarding Claim 1, the claim recites “an upper housing of the cavity”. It is unclear as to how a cavity can have a housing, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 5, the term “close to” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close to” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what distances between a rolling seal and a first end must be present so that they can be considered “close to” one another, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 7, the claim recites “a groove”. It’s unclear as to if this groove pertains to the grooves of Claim 3 or is a groove in addition to said grooves, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 8, the claim recites “a region farther from the annular groove has a larger height”. It is unclear as to what height the recited height is being compared to in the determination of “a larger height”, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims dependent upon a rejected claim are therefore rejected as well.
Allowable Subject Matter
A proper search and determination of allowable subject matter was not possible due to the 112 Rejection issues outlined above. Upon applicant' s amendment to overcome the rejections raised by the Examiner and upon the Examiner' s better understanding of the invention a comparison of the prior art to the claims will again be made. As best understood, the closest piece of prior art appears to be JP H06-249744.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am - 4pm EST.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
ALEXANDER A. MERCADO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/ALEXANDER A MERCADO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855