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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character “35” of fig. 3c” is not mentioned in the description.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7, line 2, “(314)”, should be deleted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s) has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1, recites, “a first latching mechanism and a corresponding second latching mechanism”, However in paragraphs [0042] to [0043] both latching mechanisms are defined by same latching aperture. It is not clearly defined which is first latching mechanism and which is second latching mechanism. Moreover, in Paragraph [0055], same first and second latching mechanisms are defined as latching hooks 41 and hook 12 (which is not shown on any of the drawing(s) and latching aperture 42.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for “a first latching mechanism for latching on a corresponding second latching mechanism of an adjacently stacked housing”, does not reasonably provide enablement for a first latching mechanism for latching on a corresponding second latching mechanism of an adjacently stacked housing. . The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Specification, paragraphs [0042] to [0043] and [0055] defines the first and second latching mechanisms, which are confusing, and it is not clear how both same latching mechanisms are enabling the latching mechanism and connect the adjacent housings or cover plate. It is not clear how and what parts of the which housing(s) is (or are) connecting with each other and latched by which parts of the which housing(s) or cover plate. There are also lots of
Claim 1 recites “a first latching mechanism for latching on a corresponding second latching mechanism of an adjacently stacked housing.
” which is not enabling. There is too much confusing in defining a first and second latching mechanism.
Claims 2-13 depend on claim 1.
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 2, 3 and 7 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.
Claim 2, line 2, recites, “a first latching mechanism”. It is not clear that this first latching mechanism is same or different from “a first latching mechanism” defined in claim 1, line 11, therefore it is vague and indefinite.
Claims 3 and 7 depend on claim 2.
Note: Regarding claims 1-13, as best understood, the listed prior art on PTO 892 discloses a housing arrangement interconnecting with each other by means of the latching or connecting members of neighboring housing members.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARSHAD C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8289. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:00 am - 5.00 pm (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, Abdullah A Riyami can be reached at 571-270 3119. 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.
/HARSHAD C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights