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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/23/24.
Figure(s) 5 is/are objected to under 37 C.F.R. 1.84 (h)(3), which requires hatching be used to indicate section portions of an object and that part(s) in a cross section must show proper material(s) by hatching with regularly spaced parallel oblique strokes, the space between strokes being chosen on the basis of the total area to be hatched. The various parts of a cross section of the same item should be hatched in the same manner and should accurately and graphically indicate the nature of the material(s) that is/are illustrated in cross section. The hatching of juxtaposed different elements must be angled in a different way and different types of hatching should have different convention meanings as regards the nature of a material seen in cross section. In the instant case, this appears to be a cross-sectional view, or a cutaway view of some sort, but the overlapping lines are confusing as to what’s being illustrated exactly (see annotations).
PNG
media_image1.png
422
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “hanging lugs” of claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0007 & 0036] each recites “the bowl…is made of silica gel”; however, this does not make sense because silica gel is a desiccant and is not capable of being used to form a bowl that holds fluids. This application claims priority to a Chinese application and the Chinese symbol for “silicone” and “silica gel” are the same, typically context clues are used to determine which one is appropriate. In the instant case, “silicone” is more appropriate and this is believed to be a machine translation issue. This is how the application will be treated, as claiming silica gel would result in a series of enablement rejections.
Applicant is advised that a certified translation of the priority document is required in order to amend the disclosure to appropriately change “silica gel” to “silicone”.
[0039] uses the mathematical symbol “>”; however, there is no formula disclosed. These symbols can be used in mathematical formulas, but not in the disclosure; in the disclosure, the words ---greater than--- should be used.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 4 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4: replace the mathematical symbol “>”, with the words ---greater than--- at every occurrence.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3, and 8-10 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2: recites “made of silica gel”; however, silica gel is a desiccant and is not a material from which you can make a bowl making it unclear what exactly is being claimed because it is unclear how anything made of a desiccant would be able to function as a manicure bowl. As discussed above, this is believed to be a translation error because the Chinese symbol for silicone is the same as the symbol for silica gel. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “silicone”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 3: recites “wherein cross-sections of the inner concave annular groove and the outer convex annular groove are roughly V-shaped, and the V-shaped spires of the inner concave annular groove and the outer convex annular groove are in an arc-shaped transition”. It is unclear what this language is attempting to claim and what it means. Applicant does not appear to illustrate or disclose any “spires” as there are no projecting portions which is what a spire is; this language also lacks antecedent basis. The language “in an arc-shaped transition” is also unclear. How are two annular grooves in “an arc-shaped transition” what is this “transition”? For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “wherein cross-sections of the inner concave annular groove and the outer convex annular groove are roughly V-shaped”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim 8: this claim depends indirectly from claim 6, which already requires “a hand support portion that is arced upward”; claim 8 then goes on to require “an upward bulge is formed at the bottom of the bowl bottom and a shape thereof matches a shape of the hand support portion”. However, the “upward arced” portion is the same as this “upward bulge” yet no relationship is set forth between these limitations, which is confusing. As best understood applicant is claiming the same thing multiple times with different language, which is confusing and improper. For examination purposes, the claim will be treated as reciting “wherein a material reduction cavity is formed at a bottom of the upward arced hand support portion”. Clarification or correction is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 1 and 4-8, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kusuma (US 20050127074).
Regarding the claimed invention being “a nail soaking bowl” as recited in the preamble of the claims, the applicant is advised that a recitation of the intended use of an invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the patented structure of Kusuma was considered capable of performing the cited intended use since it is an imperforate container.
Claim 1: Kusuma discloses a bowl comprising a bowl body, comprising a bowl top edge (30), a bowl wall (16), and a bowl bottom (18) that are sequentially connected from the top of the bowl to the bowl bottom and the bowl wall includes a plurality of folding annular portions (40) and a thickness of the folding annular portions (40) is less than a thickness [0033] of the rest of the bowl wall (see Fig 3) and the bowl wall can be expanded along the folding annular portions (see Figs 1-4).
Claim 4: there are at least three folding annular portions (see Figs 3-4) arranged from the top to the bottom and an outer diameter of the folding annular portions closer to the top are greater than an outer diameter of the folding annular portions closer to the base (se Figs 3-4).
Claim 5: a periphery of the bowl body at the top end comprise petal-shaped members (32, Fig 2).
Claim 6: an inner wall of the bowl bottom (18) is provided with a hand support portion that is arced upward (24) and that can be used to support a person’s palm if so desired.
Claim 7: isolated protrusions that extend down from the bowl bottom and form sunken areas (26) where a user could place their fingers if so desired (see Figs 1-3).
Claim 8: a cavity is formed behind, or as a back of, the arc shaped upward bulge (24) formed at the bottom of the bowl forming the hand support portion that supports a palm if so desired (see Figs 1-3).
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-10, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Curtin (US 7678271).
Claim 1: Curtin discloses a bowl comprising a bowl body (see Figs 11-12), the bowl body including a top edge (see Fig 12) connected to a bowl wall, and a bowl bottom (20) and the bowl wall includes a plurality of folding annular portions (22 & 24; Col 2, 35-50) having a thickness less than a thickness of the rest of the bowl wall (see Fig 17; Col 3, 35-50). The bowl wall can be folded and expanded along the plurality of folding annular portions (22 & 24; Col 2, 35-50).
Claim 2: the bowl body can be made of silicone (Col 2, 45-60) and the bowl wall includes an inner surface forming an inner wall (see Fig 17) and an outer surface forming an outer wall (see Fig 17) that are spaced apart by the thickness of the bowl walls (see Fig 17). The folding annular portion is formed by an inner concave annular groove (22 & 24, see Fig 17) on the outer wall opposite to a corresponding interior outwardly convex annular groove on the inner wall (see Fig 17)
Claim 3: the grooves are roughly V-shaped (see Figs 11 & 12 & 17).
Claim 5: a periphery of the bowl body is round shaped, which is the approximate shape of a rose petal and so it constitutes “petal-shaped”.
Claim 6: an inner wall of the bottom of the bowl is provided with a “hand support portion” that is concavely arced upward and capable of supporting a user’s palm if so desired (see annotations).
Claim 7: a front part of the hand support portion includes an isolated protrusion (see annotations) that helps to form a sunken area (see annotations) where fingers can be placed if so desired (see annotations).
Claim 8: the upward arced portion is formed by a material reduction cavity (see annotations) with the isolated protrusion being in the form of an upward extending bulge on the bottom of the bowl shaped to match the hand support portion (see annotations).
PNG
media_image2.png
364
480
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 9: stiffeners (see annotations) are arranged radially (which includes a horizontal component) and extend vertically from a rear surface of the material reduction cavity (see annotations).
PNG
media_image3.png
154
568
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 10: the bowl top edge is provided with hanging lugs or lips that extend outward for gripping (see annotations).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer Gill whose telephone number is (571)270-1797. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10:00am-5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen, can be reached on 571-270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JENNIFER GILL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/NICHOLAS D LUCCHESI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights