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
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the annular body must be shown and identified via reference number or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. In claim 5 Applicant states: “5. The bag adapter according to claim 4, wherein the outer seating frame periphery is between the top peripheral edge and the bottom peripheral edge such that the annular body is seated in the seating frame opening.” In figure 2, Applicant provides periphery 50A.sub.O1′, top edge 52, bottom edge 51, and opening O.sub.S. Applicant fails to provide the above in Applicant’s original specification as the opening is within the above elements. The elements are not seated in the same that the elements provide.
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.
Claim 6 and 10 and 14, 17-20 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 6, Applicant provides “6. The bag adapter according to claim 2, wherein the annular body has a bottom peripheral edge having a dimension greater than that of the container opening, such that the annular body is configured to be seated to a surface of the container surrounding the container opening.” Applicant has not positively claimed the container dimension and therefore Applicant’s intent is unclear. The same rejection applies to claim 10 and 14 for the same reasons.
In claim 17, Applicant provides “a plurality of the bag” of which Applicant has failed to make clear Applicant’s intent.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the bags of the plurality”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 19-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on the above rejected claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin (US 7543716 B2).
Lin discloses:
1. A bag adapter (figs 1-9) for hanging a bag to a top container rim of a container circumscribing a container opening at least equal in dimension to the bottom bag dimension, a bag having a bottom bag dimension at most equal to a throat section of the container, the container opening being at least equal in dimension to the bottom bag dimension (capable of performing the above intended use; the above elements are not positively cited and the adapter is capable of interacting with bag, container, and the above features), the bag adapter comprising a seating frame having an inner seating frame periphery circumscribing a seating frame opening (30 with edge along inside as fig 2 with aperture within as in fig 2), the seating frame sized to be mounted onto the top container rim such that the seating frame opening is in communication with the container opening (capable of performing the above intended use, such as but not required as shown in fig 4).
2. The bag adapter according to claim 1, wherein the seating frame has an annular body (as in fig 2).
3. The bag adapter according to claim 2, wherein the annular body tapers from a top peripheral edge to a bottom peripheral edge (as shown by shape in fig 4).
4. The bag adapter according to claim 3, wherein the annular body defines an outer seating frame periphery that corresponds in shape and/or in dimension to seating frame opening (wall of device provides the opening and the shape and dimension).
5. The bag adapter according to claim 4, wherein the outer seating frame periphery is between the top peripheral edge and the bottom peripheral edge such that the annular body is seated in the seating frame opening (see 112 rejection above; inasmuch as Applicant provides the above, the prior art also discloses the above; fig 1-9).
6. The bag adapter according to claim 2, wherein the annular body has a bottom peripheral edge having a dimension greater than that of the container opening, such that the annular body is configured to be seated to a surface of the container surrounding the container opening (see 112 rejection above; nevertheless the prior discloses the above fig 1-9).
7. The bag adapter according to claim 2, wherein a flange projects from and surrounds the annular body, the flange configured to be supported against a surface of the container when the bag adapter is mounted to the container (adjacent 33).
8. The bag adapter according to claim 1, wherein the seating frame is laterally open (fig 4).
9. The bag adapter according to claim 8, further comprising a clamping frame pivotally connected to the seating frame, the clamping frame closing onto the seating frame to hold a bag therebetween (adjacent 40 with pivoting for example shown between figs 3, 4).
10. The bag adapter according to claim 9, wherein the seating frame has a bottom peripheral edge having a dimension greater than that of the container opening, such that the seating frame is configured to be seated to a surface of the container surrounding the container opening (see 112 rejection above; nevertheless the prior discloses the above fig 1-9).
11. The bag adapter according to claim 9, wherein a flange projects from and surrounds the seating frame, the flange configured to be supported against a surface of the container when the bag adapter is mounted to the container (adjacent 33).
12. The bag adapter according to claim 11, wherein the seating frame has at least one tab projecting from the flange, the at least one tab projecting toward the container upon the bag adapter being mounted to the container (vertical tabs shown in fig 2 on 30 around the periphery).
13. The bag adapter according to claim 9, wherein a tab projects from the clamping frame, the tab for pivoting the clamping frame relative to the seating frame (adjacent 41).
14. A kit comprising: the bag adapter according to claim 1; and at least one bag, the bag having a bottom bag dimension at most equal to a throat section of the container (as shown in fig 3, 4 with 10).
15. The kit according to claim 14, wherein the bottom bag dimension has a dimension smaller than the seating frame opening (as shown in fig 3, 4 with 10).
16. The kit according to claim 14, wherein the bottom bag dimension is smaller than a top bag periphery (as shown in fig 3, 4 with 10).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 14, 15 above, and further in view of Stravitz (US 9555962 B1).
The Office notes the 112 rejection above. Nevertheless, Lin discloses the claimed invention above with the exception of the following which is disclosed by Stravitz: a plurality of bags, wherein the bags of the plurality are in a roll, wherein the bags in the roll are connected from a bottom of one of the bags to a top of a subsequent one of the bags, wherein the roll is in a cassette body (such as with bags within refill canister in column 25-26). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lin in view of Stravitz (by providing multiple bags within a roll/cassette) in order to provide the user within additional means to hold trash thereby permitting the device to be used more efficiently without the need to load the device quite as much.
Conclusion
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