DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The subject matter of this application admits of illustration by new drawing(s) to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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).
With regard to claim(s) 1 & 3, the “air extraction system” has not been depicted.
With regard to claim(s) 13, this arrangement has not been depicted. Further, claim(s) 7 recites feature(s) such that “one or more” should say something like --a plurality of--.
With regard to claim(s) 14-17 & The spot processing that “relates” to: welding; metal polishing; painting and cutting have not been depicted.
With regard to claim(s) 20, the car has not been depicted.
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 Objections
Claims 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
They appear to be claiming a person in action.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
With regard to claim(s) 1:
the relationship between the “area” of line(s) 1 & the “smaller area” of line(s) 5 is unclear.
In line(s) 4, “open side” lack(s) antecedent basis.
In line(s) 6, “free edge” lack(s) antecedent basis. What if the sheet is circular?
In line 4, “outlined edge” of what?
In line(s) 14 & 18, “other sidewalls”, a first or primary sidewall had not been previously recited.
Regarding claim 2, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
With regard to claim(s) 4, which of the “other sidewalls” is being referred to?
With regard to claim(s) 5, “sealing means” lack(s) antecedent basis.
With regard to claim(s) 6 & 10, the relationship between the ventilator & the cabin air extraction of claim(s) 1 is unclear.
With regard to claim(s) 7-13, relating to claim(s) 7, line(s) 1, “cabin system” lack(s) antecedent basis. Further, claim(s) 7, line(s) 6, which “air extraction” is being referred to?
With regard to claim(s) 12, line(s) 2, “after” is unclear as a direction has not been established.
With regard to claim(s) 14-17, what is meant by an “application” is unclear particularly in view of the fact that the applicant is claiming a method in claim(s) 18. Further, “relates to” is unclear. Finally, the last clause question if the applicant is attempting to capture subject matter relating to a state of mind.
With regard to claim(s) 18, “object” lack(s) antecedent basis.
With regard to claim(s) 19, the relationship between the mobile cabin & the cabin system is unclear.
Conclusion
Be advised, the applicant is not to take failure by the examiner to apply a prior art rejection as an indication of allowable subject matter. This is pending claim clarification.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A DILLON JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6913. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday; 8AM-6:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mike McCullough can be reached on (571)272-7805. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are (703)305-7687 for regular communications and (703)308-0552 for After Final communications.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (703)308-1134.
/JOSEPH A DILLON JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3653