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 .
DETAILED ACTION
RESPONSE TO ELECTION/RESTRICTION
Applicant’s election without traverse of the following elected species:
PNG
media_image1.png
190
358
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in the reply filed on 8/17/2026 is acknowledged.
However the election of species requirement is hereby withdrawn.
An action on the merits of claims 1-11 is contained herein.
Priority
This application is a national phase entry under 35 U.S.C. 371 of international application PCT/JP2023/010103, filed 3/15/2023, which claims priority to JP2022-056258, filed 3/30/2022.
However, a certified English version of the foreign priority document was not received.
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application (i.e., the examiner respectfully requests submission of the appropriate English translated version of the foreign priority document if benefit is sought). See MPEP 213.04.
Information Disclosure Statement
The examiner has considered the references cited in the information disclosure statement filed of record.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-11 are objected to because the language “according to Claim 1" should more appropriately read " according to claim 1". Claims should only begin with a capital letter and end with a period. See MPEP 608.01(m). Correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 9 be found allowable, claim 10 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). In the instant case, the scope of these claims are identical despite the wording recited in the preamble.
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 1-11 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In the instant claim 1, the following designations for variable Q are shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
146
612
media_image2.png
Greyscale
. However the points of attachment to these groups are not clearly articulated in the claim. For example is the point of attachment to the nitrogen atom as shown with red arrow or somewhere else wherein the line could also be represented as a methyl group? Thus the scope of the claim and claims dependent on it which do not rectify the issue are considered indefinite. The examiner will assume the former in terms of search purposes. See In re Zletz, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322, “An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct and unambiguous.”
In claim 11, the scope of “controlling pests” is unclear as there is no definition regarding the latter in the specification as filed. The metes and bounds of the term “controlling” is not readily ascertained by the skilled artisan. Additionally, specification provides some examples regarding the term “pests” but appears to be exemplary and not limited in scope.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN E MCDOWELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5755. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-6 MF.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Murray can be reached at 571-272-9023. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN E MCDOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1624
Prosecution Insights