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
New corrected drawings (for all drawings with the exception of the new drawings Applicant provided) in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the drawings provided by Applicant are not decipherable. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-10, 12-20 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.
In claim 1, Applicant provides “the set being configured either to be removable affixed” of which Applicant fails to make clear Applicant’s intent. Claims 2-10, 12-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on the above rejected claim(s). Applicant should correct the above to - - the set removably affixed - -.
Applicant selects language that fails to make clear Applicant’s intent of whether or not the structure is required or not. For example, in claim 1, Applicant provides “a rod dimensioned to be inserted”. Claims 2-10, 12-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on the above rejected claim(s). Applicant should correct the above to - - a rod inserted - -.
Applicant also provides “a given rod receptacle is configured to have the rod secured in the hollow” of which also required correction in claim 1. Claims 2-10, 12-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on the above rejected claim(s).
Claim 4, 6, 20 also require correction, such as to “configured to be seperable…dimensioned to removably affix…dimensioned to be removably affixed to the back…”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "said first strap”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “said first strap”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the harness”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Holmes (US 8453872 B1).
The Office notes the significant 112 rejections above. Nevertheless, Holmes discloses:
1. (currently amended) An article of manufacture (figs 1-18, including figs 10-18) comprising: a wheeled waste container having a body and a wheel axle affixed to the body (as in fig 14), the wheel axle carrying wheels of the wheeled waste container (fig 14); and equipment that includes: a set of rod receptacles (receptacles as in fig 10 that hold 130s), a rod receptacle of the set having a hollow extending along an axis (hollow portion that holds 130), the set being configured either to be removably affixed to a back of the wheeled waste container (as in figs 10-18) such as to have a corresponding axis of the rod receptacle of the set to extend along the back and transversely to an axle carrying wheels of the wheeled waste container (as in fig 14); and a handle member including a rod dimensioned to be inserted into the rod receptacle of the set (adjacent 130 with 130a, 130b), and a handle member bar that is substantially transverse to the rod (such as adjacent “134”), wherein a given rod receptacle is configured to have the rod secured in the hollow (capable of performing the above intended use).
2. (currently amended) An article of manufacture according to claim 1, wherein the set includes first and second rods receptacles (as in fig 10), the handle member includes respectively corresponding first and second rods (fig 10), and wherein the handle member bar is configured to connect said first and second rods with one another (fig 10).
3. (original) An article of manufacture according to claim 2, wherein the handle member bar has an adjustable length (capable of performing the above intended use).
9. (currently amended) An article of manufacture according to claim 1 wherein the set includes first and second receptacles, wherein the equipment is separable from the wheeled waste container and dimensioned to have a separation between the first and second receptacles no larger than a width of the wheeled waste container (capable of performing the above intended use, fig 10, 14).
Re claims 10-19, as discussed above, the applied prior art teaches the product as claimed. To the extent that the claimed product performs the claimed method, the prior art product performs the method steps, as claimed. In order to expedite prosecution for Applicant, the Office notes that the prior art discloses the above and further Official Notice is taken, that it is old and conventional to provide a harness, rigid bar, lever, ribs, etc. with all of the above features in claims 10-19. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made in view of the Official Notice to provide a waste container, harness, rigid bar, wheels, axles, lever, ribs, lid, lid axle, etc. with all of the features of claims 10-19 in order to assist the user in using the device such as by ensuring that the device remains in place as desired.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered, but are moot because in view of the amendment the search has been updated, new prior art has been identified and a new rejection has been made.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8, 20 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.
The Office notes that Applicant includes in Applicant’s original specification that harness is “a strap 204 appropriately dimensioned and equipped to encircle the body of the container” .
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ANDREW D PERREAULT whose telephone number is (571)270-5427. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-5:30pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571)272-4561. 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.
/ANDREW D PERREAULT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights