DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II, claims 9-16 in the reply filed on 02/19/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the restriction between alleged inventions I, II and III is improper”, (see pages 9-13 of the response filed 2/09/2026. This is not found persuasive because the grounds for the restriction between the independent claims 1, 9 and 17 of respective invention groups I, II and III remain proper even in the light of the claim amendments filed 02/19/2026. Neither of independent claims 1 or 17 include the casing comprising a plate having a plurality of openings; and a plurality of sleeves stacked in a first direction extending from the plurality of openings, adjacent sleeves of the plurality of sleeves belonging to a different one of a first line of sleeves and a second line of sleeves that are displaced from each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction as recited in independent claim 9. Independent claim 9 does not recite that the casing is a flexible polymer casing comprising a plurality of explosive charge mountings in a zipper configuration, as recited independent claim 1. Independent claim 9 does not recite that the casing is formed by additive manufacturing or that the casing is employed in a method of breaching a steel bar grating, as recited in independent method claim 17. To search claims drawn to invention groups I and III in addition to the claims of the elected group II would place an excessive burden on the examiner by requiring different fields of searching such as the formulation of invention specific search queries. Furthermore, the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 9-16 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.
In claim 9, line 4, the limitation, “…adjacent sleeves of the plurality of sleeves belonging to a different one of a first line of sleeves…”, is not understood.
In claim 9, lines 5-6, the limitation, “…and a second line of sleeves that are displaced from each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction…”.
Matching the above limitations to the flexible polymer casing 34 as shown in Figs. 1-3 has not been possible.
In claim 10, it is unclear if the applicant is attempting to claim that the sleeve spacings are configured to sandwich a respective steel bar grating?
Claims 13 and 14 improperly modify claim 9 which is drawn to a casing for an explosive device as distinct from the combination of a casing and an explosive device.
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NEWELL (US 2020/0399994 A1). The following rejection in made in the light of the 112(b) rejection as discussed above.
Regarding claim 9, Newell discloses casing for an explosive device 20 comprising: a plate 21 having a plurality of openings 22; and a plurality of sleeves 24 stacked in a first direction extending from the plurality of openings, adjacent sleeves of the plurality of sleeves belonging to a different one of a first line of sleeves and a second line of sleeves that are displaced from each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (see Figs.2 and 3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. see the attached PTO-FORM 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S BERGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5am.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/JAMES S BERGIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights