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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/5/26 has been entered.
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 1-12 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 (lines 15-16), the phrase “a plurality of pin electrodes, each being connected to the other end of a respective one of the plurality of pins” is not clear since the phrase “the other end” lacks antecedent basis. Should the phrase “the other end” instead read as --the another end-- to be consistent with line 14 which recites “another end”.
In Claim 5 (lines 12-13), the phrase “connected to another end of the first pin and a second pin electrode connected to another end of the second pin” is not clear how the “another end” of the first and second pins relates to the “another end” in Claim 1. Should the phrase “connected to another end of the first pin and a second pin electrode connected to another end of the second pin” instead read as --connected to the another end of the first pin and a second pin electrode connected to the another end of the second pin-- since the ‘another end” has previously been recited in Claim 1?
In Claim 7 (lines 22-24), the phrase “connected to another end of the first pin, a second pin electrode connected to another end of the second pin, a third pin electrode connected to another end of the third pin, and a fourth pin electrode connected to another end of the fourth pin” is not clear how the “another end” of the first, second, third, and fourth pins relates to the “another end” in Claim 1. Should the phrase “connected to another end of the first pin, a second pin electrode connected to another end of the second pin, a third pin electrode connected to another end of the third pin, and a fourth pin electrode connected to another end of the fourth pin” instead read as --connected to the another end of the first pin, a second pin electrode connected to the another end of the second pin, a third pin electrode connected to the another end of the third pin, and a fourth pin electrode connected to the another end of the fourth pin -- since the “another end” has previously been recited in Claim 1?
Dependent claims inherit the defects of the claims from which they depend.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN E JONES whose telephone number is (571)272-1762. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM to 5PM.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/Stephen E. Jones/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights