DETAILED ACTION
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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims do not particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention, in that the scope of invention has not been sufficiently defined, making the boundaries of the scope of claim language unclear. See MPEP 2173. The claims lack sufficient structural and/or functional language required to clearly define the scope of a distinct operable invention. Some examples of this lack of structural and/or functional language are directed to the following:
In claim 1, line 1, after “manner,”, it is suggested that –the swing handle arrangement—be inserted, for clarity.
In claim 1, throughout the claim “pivotable” movement is set forth, yet it is unclear in each case what the pivotable movement of the referred to element is intended to be pivotable relative to in the context of the claim language.
Throughout the claims, particularly independent claim 1, various elements and/or functional language is set forth, yet the intended structural and/or functional purposes of such elements is unclear and not fully understood in the context of the claimed invention.
In claim 1, “the locking of the swing handle arrangement” appears to lack antecedent basis. Further, it is not understood what is intended to constitutes such locking of the swing handle arrangement”.
The same or similar 112 issues as above are found throughout the remaining claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11, as best understood, 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-7064. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through 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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/MARK A WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights