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 .
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 1-12 and 16- 19 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 1 recites the limitation "the weld path" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This will be read as “the welding path”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the laser-weldable conduit" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This will be read as “the at least one laser-weldable conduit”. This should also be addressed in claims 5-7 and 10. “The” laser-weldable conduit is not defined in the circumstance that plural laser-weldable conduits are utilized.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the axial direction" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the at least one laser-weldable polymer film" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the at least one laser-weldable polymer film" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the at least one laser-weldable polymer film" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the at least one laser-welded joint" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the laser-weldable conduit" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the at least one laser-weldable polymer film layer" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the at least one polymer tube" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the welding path" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the welding path" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the axial direction" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-15 allowed.
Claims 1-12 and 16-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: GATTUSO et al. (US 6,086,041) is considered the closest prior art of record, disclosing arranging a component on a seat inflatable bladder carrier, and laser welding the component to the polymer contact interface. Similar welding methods and articles claimed are disclosed by BRNCICK et al. (US 2012/0280554), CLAPPER (US 2003/0030319), and BURT (US 2002/0056709). The prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest a such a method or article wherein the component welded to the bladder comprises a laser-weldable conduit and the conduit comprises a polymer film to which the conduit is welded.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nickolas R Harm whose telephone number is (571)270-7605. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-6:00.
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, Phillip Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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.
/NICKOLAS R HARM/Examiner, Art Unit 1745
/PHILIP C TUCKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1745