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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 3/4/26. These drawings are objected to.
Replacement drawing Figure 3 refers to the front shaping as “270”. However, figures 4 and 5 still use “27” to designate the front shaping. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "270" and "27" have both been used to designate the front shaping. 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.
Applicant’s argument with regards to the drawing objection regarding improper shading is persuasive. The objection for improper shading has been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 11, 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11, line 2, “coupling means comprise” should be “coupling portion comprises” for consistency purposes.
Claim 12, line 2, “coupling means further comprise” should be “coupling portion further comprises” for consistency purposes.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant’s amendment to claim 10 and 13 have precluded an interview under 112(f). All claims are being interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 and claim 13 have been amended to recite “the rod being axially movable relative to the hollow stem in an unconstrained manner over at least a predetermined travel distance”. This has not been shown or described in the original disclosure. As argued below, it is unclear what “an unconstrained manner” encompasses in light of the specification. The specification does not use this terminology or analogous terminology to describe any “unconstrained” axial movement between the rod and stem. Rather, the telescopic arrangement of the rod passing within the hollow stem appears to entirely constrain the movement of the rod to a coaxial path. Therefore, this amendment introduces new matter.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-12, 14 are rejected under 112(a) as they contain all the deficiencies of claim 1 or 13 from which they depend.
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 1-6, 8-14 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 and claim 13 have been amended to recite “the rod being axially movable relative to the hollow stem in an unconstrained manner over at least a predetermined travel distance”. It is unclear what “an unconstrained manner” encompasses in light of the specification. The rod element 3 axially moves within the closed-walled bore of the hollow stem 2 which is constraining the rod’s position at all times in a telescopic arrangement. There appears to be no moment when the rod is axially moving within the stem where the rod is not constrained therein. The rod is further constrained in axial movement by the interference of anchor tip 31 at the distal end which does not allow proximal translation of the rod 3 past the point the tip 31 engages with the front shaping of the stem (see figure 3). It is unclear if applicant is referring to a rotational relationship, however there is no part of the specification which describes relative rotation between the stem and rod so it is unclear if that is the intent of “an unconstrained manner”.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-12, 14 are rejected under 112(b) as they contain all the deficiencies of claim 1 or 13 from which they depend.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of 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 JACQUELINE T JOHANAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5085. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:00-5:00.
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, Eduardo Robert can be reached at 571-272-4719. 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.
/JACQUELINE T JOHANAS/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights