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 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 1-15 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 1, “considerable thickness” is vague. What is “considerable”? One micrometer, one millimeter, etc.? Clarification is required.
In claim 1, lines 3-4, “has series of holes on either sides that are short” does not make sense. Are holes formed on either of the short sides of the rectangle? Clarification is required.
In claim 1, lines 5-6, “has two rectangular walls one inside the other with an opening on its long side” does not make sense. Do both walls have an opening? Clarification is required.
In claim 1, lines 10-11, “on either sides of the rectangular flat sheet but located only on the top” does not make sense.
In claim 1, lines 14-15, “located on either sides of the said rectangular sheet but only on the bottom” does not make sense.
In claim 1, there are many spelling and grammatical errors, such as “considrable” in line 2, “either sides” in line 4, etc.
The following claim 1 drafted by the examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, is presented to applicant for consideration:
Suggested language for claim 1:
A composite structure which is an island mat comprising:
a rectangular flat sheet with a thickness, a top side and a bottom side;
wherein the sheet has a series of holes formed along at least one of the short sides of the rectangular sheet;
wherein the sheet has two rectangular walls, one inside the other, wherein both walls have an opening on at least one of its long sides;
wherein the outside rectangular wall is taller than the inside rectangular wall;
wherein the walls are formed on the top side of the sheet;
wherein the sheet has at least one X-shaped rib formed on the bottom side of the sheet to prevent slipping.
Claims 2-4, 10, 12 and 14 do not provide any structural limitations but merely recite functions of the existing components.
In claim 5, is the “small outlet” a different opening than described in claim 1? If not, the claim does not further limit claim 1.
In claim 9, is the strap attached to the sheet? Otherwise, the claim is not further limiting the structure of claim 1 but merely reciting functions, i.e. rolling, folding.
In claim 11, line 1, is “with said” supposed to be “withstand”?
In claim 13, line 1, “made on” should be “made of”.
In claim 15, what does “curves on the side of the said kitchen island to prevent cracks to form due to weight” mean?
Suggested language for claims 6-8 and 13:
The composite structure of claim 1, wherein suction cups may be positioned in the holes to affix the mat to the kitchen island.
The composite structure of claim 1, wherein Velcro may be attached to the bottom side of the sheet to affix the mat to the kitchen island.
The composite structure of claim 1, wherein the sheet is made of a food-grade material, a nontoxic material, and/or a BPS-free material.
The composite structure of claim 1, wherein the sheet is made of a smooth material for easy wiping and to provide a surface for use with suction-based devices such a plates or tumblers.
Conclusion
The closest prior art, US 2017/0055746, discloses a mat comprising a rectangular sheet and a bottom nonslip surface used to protect a tabletop. The material is smooth for easy wiping. The edge has a lip to prevent spillage. However, the reference does not disclose a second lip formed within outer lip nor does the reference disclose holes formed in an edge portion of the rectangular sheet.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH EVANS MULVANEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1527. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm M-F.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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.
/ELIZABETH E MULVANEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights