DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 3, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 of claim 2, “be support” should apparently read - - be supported - -; in line 2 of claim 3, “be support” should apparently read - - be supported - -; and in line 3 of claim 11, “be support” should apparently read - - be supported - -;. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 and 16-21 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 recites “a swivel element… is pivotable” in lines 4-5. It is unclear if the “pivotable” language is intended to refer to the flat element or the swivel element. The claim recites “an adjustment drive… which can be driven” in lines 7-8. It is unclear if the “driven” language is intended to refer to the drive, the pinion, or the toothed segment.
Claims 2-14 and 16-21 are deemed indefinite because they are dependent on an indefinite claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 and 16-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: while the closest prior art (see JP 2011173497 as provided by Applicant and US 10315541 to Kostin) show similar adjustment devices including toothed segments in conjunction with deformation sections, it does not disclose an arrangement with deformation in a crash resulting in a support section of the toothed segment engaging (that is being supported by) a flat element opposite the deformation section or a first or second assembly as claimed. Note that the claims have been interpreted as providing the support section not supported on/by and/or directly engaged with the flat element, first, or second assembly prior to a crash involving deformation of the deformation section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 August 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. That is, while Applicant’s amendment addressed the prior claim objections and many of the prior 35 USC 112 rejections, some 35 USC 112 rejections remain while new objections have been made in view of the amended language.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of objection/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 PHILIP F GABLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2155. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 - 4:30.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 571-272-6670. 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.
/PHILIP F GABLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights