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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 3/18/2026, have been reviewed and considered. Claims 1-2, 12 and 16 have been amended and therefore, claims 1-22 are currently pending. Applicant’s amendments are sufficient in overcoming the prior art rejections of the previous Office Action. However, the applicant’s amendments have prompted the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) rejections as presented below. This Office Action is considered a Final Rejection.
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 1-15 and 20-22 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Within the last couple lines of claim 1, the applicant recites, “the reinforcing rib having a closed surface that divides the hollow portion into upper and lower closed spaces”. Note that the applicant’s hollow portion (130), including the spaces (hollow portions 431, 432, 433, 434, 435) as defined by the reinforcing rib(s) (440, 441, 442, 443) thereof, are not “closed” as shown in applicant’s figures 10-14C because the spaces having openings at least extending laterally therethrough as defined above and below each of the reinforcing ribs. Additionally, it is not even clear if the reinforcing rib(s) extend entirely across the depth of the power transmitter or just across a small portion thereof. Accordingly, the spaces (hollow portions 431, 432, 433, 434, 435) could also be open along the tops and bottoms thereof. Therefore, the use of the term “closed” within the phrase “upper and lower closed spaces” is considered new matter.
Claims 2-15 and 20-22 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
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 1-15 and 20-22 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.
Within the last couple lines of claim 1, the applicant recites, “the reinforcing rib having a closed surface that divides the hollow portion into upper and lower closed spaces”. This recitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the upper and lower spaces are to be considered “closed” if each of the spaces appears to be laterally open above and below each reinforcing rib. Please note the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection as discussed above.
Claims 2-15 and 20-22 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-19 are allowed.
Claims 1-15 and 20-22 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. Note that KIM et al. (KR 10-2018-0024348) fails to disclose the upper and lower portions being “closed spaces”; however, note that the term “closed” has been rejected above as being “new matter”. The reinforcing rib of KIM (as defined in the previous Office Action) can be considered protruding “from inner surfaces of the power transmitter” and connecting “the inner surfaces of the power transmitter to each other” because the reinforcing rib has a donut-like shaped. Note that the center opening which defines the inner boundary of the donut-like shape is not part of the reinforcing rib itself. Accordingly, the reinforcing rib can be considered “having a closed surface” as claimed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN E DURHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Alissa J Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. 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.
NED
/NATHAN E DURHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights