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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "23" and "29" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 1.
Reference characters "63", "51", and "55" have all been used to designate the same element in Figure 2.
Reference characters "61", "49", "53", "47", "43", and "39" have all been used to designate the same element in Figure 2.
Reference characters "59" and "57" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 2.
Reference characters "39" and "43" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "73" and "57" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "9" and "21" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "11" and "19" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "7" and "29" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 6.
Reference characters "69" and "71" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 5.
Reference characters "9" and "19" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 7A.
Reference characters "11" and "21" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 7A.
Reference characters "103" and "105" have both been used to designate the same element in Figure 9.
Reference characters denoting an overall element of the invention should include an arrowhead at the end of its leader line.
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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 1’ and 75.
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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “11” has been used to designate both the second connector in Figure 1 and the second load member in Figure 5.
Reference character “71” has been used to designate both inner surface of the wheel in Figure 4 and part of the groove in Figure 6.
Reference character “61” has been used to designate both a side of the support member in Figure 2 and the tip of the second locking member in Figure 6.
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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "103" and "105" have both been used to designate the wheel rim in Figure 9.
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. 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains legal terms (see section 7 below). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “comprising”, “means”, and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 25 or page 25 through line 9 of page 12 is merely a copy of the independent claim, and should therefore be removed.
Pages 21-22 includes an incomplete list of reference characters. Therefore, these pages should either be removed or amended to include all of the reference characters used in the application.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3 of claim 14, the term “a” should be replaced with the term - -the- - prior to the term “radial”, for proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 4 be found allowable, claim 12 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).
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 1-16 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrases “configured to be attached”, and configured to engage”. These phrases are generally narrative (see section 12 below) and fail to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 5 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to mate”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 8 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear how the gripping member extends “in a direction away from” load member body. No directional indicators (i.e. axially, radially, etc.) have been provided to clearly define this limitation.
Claim 9 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to resiliently flex”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 10 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to interact”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 11 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to face”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 13 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to extend”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 14 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the phrase “configured to provide”. This phrase is generally narrative (see section 13 below) and fails to describe any actual physical structure of the invention.
Claim 15 is indefinite due to the fact that it is unclear what is actually being claimed by the limitation that the first and second locking members have a “stationary physical shape”.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
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) 1-2, 4, 6-9, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hubbell (734,417).
Per claim 1, Hubbell shows a balancing assembly having a support member 2 extending in a direction along a first longitudinal axis and having a height extending along a first radial axis. The support member 2 includes a first surface attached to a surface area of a rim of a wheel 1, a second surface, and an intermediate portion (generally at 3, i.e. the body thereof) extending in a direction parallel to the radial axis, and a first locking member 4. A load member body 5 extends in a direction having a second longitudinal axis, and including a primary surface, a first connecting member (one of the legs of the U-shape) positioned on a first side of the second longitudinal axis, and a second connecting member (the other of the legs of the U-shape) positioned on a second side of the second longitudinal axis. Both the first and second connecting members are “configured to engage” the intermediate portion 3 of the support member 2 to secure the load member body 5 in the radial direction. A second locking member 6 engages the first locking member 4 to secure the load member 5 in a longitudinal direction.
Per claim 2, the first locking member 4 has a first physical structure, while the second locking member 6 has a second physical structure. The first and second physical structures cooperate with each other.
Per claims 4 and 12, the first locking member is positioned on the second surface of the support member 2 and the second locking member 6 is positioned on the primary surface of the load member 5.
Per claim 6, a width of the load member 5 is larger than the width of the support member 2 in a direction along a transverse axis.
Per claim 7, the intermediate portion 3includes a first groove positioned on one side of the first longitudinal axis, and a second groove positioned on the opposite side of the first longitudinal axis.
Per claim 8, the load member 5 includes a gripping member (generally the axially inward surface of the leg of the U-shape in which the second lock member 6 extends) extending “in a direction away from” the body thereof, allowing a gripping force to be applied to the load member body 5 for attachment and/or release relative to the support member 2.
Per claim 9, the load member body 5 is resiliently flexible in a transverse direction.
Per claim 13, the support member 2 extends along the full circumference of the rim of the wheel 1.
Per claim 14, the first and second connecting members provide an engagement force in the radial direction between the first 4 and second 6 locking members.
Per claim 15, the first 4 and second 6 locking members have a “stationary physical shape”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 10-11, and 16 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references show balance weight structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/JASON R BELLINGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights