DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16-17 and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/27/25.
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 14-15 and 18 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.
Independent claim 14 appears to be a rough foreign translation and contains a litany of unclear and indefinite limitations.
Claim 14 recites lists “sheets of thin material or foil” and then references separate sheets later on “the tabs of one sheet can be inserted and fixed into corresponding recesses of the other sheet” without delineating any particular structures of either sheet. In the same instance, “recesses” are disclosed, however there is no delineation between recesses of first sheet e.g. 17 and recesses of a second sheet e.g. 13 (e.g. Fig. 2).
Claim 14 recites an optional recitation, “and/or recesses”, then recites characteristics of the recesses (which are further unclear, as two disparate sets of recesses are shown in the Figures).
Claim 14 recites a “a minimum distance” in two separate instances, without any clarity of what defines the “minimum” quality. For example, in many examples shown, the “minimum distance” is not actually a minimum distance, i.e. the distance could be smaller without effecting the operation of the device.
Claim 14 recites “the tabs at their base are flexibly connected by a flexible flange” which contradicts the Specification and Drawings which show a fold line. A “flexible flange” is what one of ordinary skill would understand to be a separate structure attached to the sheets of thin material or foil rather than simply a line of weakness or perforation directly in the material to effectuate a fold line.
Claim 15 contains language all without proper antecedent basis such as “the binding edge of the sheet” (again both sheets are conflated as the same sheet as described further convoluting the language) and “their central portion”. The “humps” are completely unclear as they appears to be drawn to elements outside of the previously claimed elements (e.g. on a separate part of the sheet) than the previously recited “tabs and/or recesses”.
Claim 18 contains some definite structure however, its dependence on claim 14 renders the claim indefinite and unclear. Furthermore, the claim is mostly comprised of functional language which is impossible to ascertain without a clear and definite structure.
This is not intended to be a complete or comprehensive listing of 35 USC 112 issues. Compliance with 35 USC 112 is the responsibility of the applicant.
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mignon-Falize (Fr 936,384).
The structure claimed is impossible to ascertain for several reasons detailed in the 35 USC 112 above, however, as best can be construed by the Examiner, Mignon-Falize disclose sheets of thin material, a first sheet M and a second sheet N which each have an edge (Fig. 3); on one sheet having recesses 2 (formed by lines CH-HD-DC) and the other sheet having tabs 1 (formed by lines C’I-IJ-JD’) (Figs. 1-2); a mutual position of the tabs and recesses from each sheet allow the tabs to be inserted into the recesses for fastening.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 18 may be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Because claim 14 is inscrutable and cannot be accurately compared to the prior art, these claims are only believed to have subject matter which appears, if claimed in a definite and clear manner, along with a clear and definite claim 14, appears to have subject matter which is not disclosed by the prior art. Particularly “humps” or a “row of pushing blocks” which provide a folded sheet portion at an angle, which only appears useful for the particular apparatus (non-elected invention). However, upon a claim amendment compliant with 35 USC 112, a full search and consideration of the new material is required.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gokkel (WO 2016/204613), Chamberlain (US 3,275,003), Nelson (US 2,918,066), Hooe (US 2,598,379), Clarke (US 2,575,583), Gokkel (US 2015/0014978), Gokkel (US 2008/0157516), Smith (US 2023/0173838), Scheel (US 5,725,196), Spicers Limited (GB 285,306), and Floymayr (DE 20-2009-003171), disclose similar inventions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT GRABOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3518. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Daniel Troy, can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/KYLE R GRABOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637