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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-15 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on the merits.
Claims 1-15 are rejected herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action an information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 08/08/2024 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 6, 11, 13 and 14 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The recitation “the blade” in line 2 of claim 6 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the Applicant is referring to the first blade, the second blade or some other blade.
Claim 11 is indefinite because it is unclear how the first and second connecting bars are arranged on a common oval. The Examiner has interpreted that the first and second connecting bar defining a major or minor diameter of an ellipse.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the radial direction" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim 14 is rejected based on its dependency on claim 13.
Appropriate correction/explanation is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parent (U.S. Pat. No. 7721400 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Parent teaches a clamp (Fig. 2) for limiting cracks in logs, having two blades (11, 11A) which each extend from a back surface (back of 10) to a cutting edge (lower portion of 10) along a cutting direction and which are tapered (Fig. 15: 86) in the cutting direction, the cutting directions (downward) of the two blades are aligned parallel to one another and wherein the two blades are connected by a first connecting bar (bar defined at 14) which extends between first end regions of the two blades and by a second connecting bar (bar defined at 15) which extends between second end regions of the two blades. Parent teaches various embodiments. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the blades disclosed in Fig. 1 tapered in the cutting direction such that the cutting direction of the two blades are aligned parallel to one another e.g. by tapering each blade in the same direction. The motivation would have been to increase friction in the vertical direction.
Regarding claim 2, Parent teaches the first connecting bar (defined at 14) and the second connecting bar (defined at 15) each extend between the back surfaces of the two blades.
Regarding claim 8, Parent teaches the two blades (11, 11A) are aligned mirror-symmetrically with respect to one another, a mirror plane for the two blades being aligned normal to a minimum distance between the two blades.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 7, 9-12, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 6, 11, 13 and 14 would 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.
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 MUHAMMAD IJAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am-10:00 pm.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 5712728227. 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.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3631
/Muhammad Ijaz/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights