DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species 1, figures 1A-B, claims 21-23, 25-31 and 36-38 in the reply filed on 7/23/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species are “connected in at least one of design”. This is not found persuasive because species are distinct if it can be shown that they have different structural features. These differences were outlined in the election requirement set forth in the office action mailed on 6/3/2026. In order to overcome this type of restriction, the applicant would have to state that the species are obvious variants of one another and are not patentability distinct from one another. The applicant has failed to make this statement.
The applicant has stated that claim 22 reads on the elected species 1, figures 1A-B. However, this species fails to disclose one or more additional bores in the first and second apertures in-between the proximal and distal bores. Therefore, claim 22 has been withdrawn as being drawn to a non-elected species.
Claims 32-35 and 39-41 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7/23/2026.
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 21, 23, 25-31, and 36-38 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.
Regarding claim 21 and any claim that depends therefrom, the last paragraph of the claim is indefinite. It is suggested that the paragraph be changed to “(d) one or more slits intersecting each [[aperture]] of the first and second aperture such that each of the first and second lobes form cantilevered springs which elastically deflect to accommodate movement of the bar or pin within the [[slots]] slot of each of the first and second aperture between the proximal and distal bores of each of the first and second apertures” to correct the indefiniteness problem. In line 14, “the slots” lacks antecedence. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to “the slot in the first lobe and the slot in the second lobe” to correct the problem.
Regarding claim 25, “the first and second slits” lack antecedence.
Regarding claim 28, “the first distal bore” lacks antecedence. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to “the distal bore of the first aperture” to correct the problem. And, “the first proximal bore” lacks antecedence. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to “the proximal bore of the first aperture” to correct the problem.
Regarding claim 36, line 2, “the first proximal bore” lacks antecedence. In line 3, “the slot” is indefinite. Which slot is being referred to? Is it the slot in the first lobe or the slot in the second lobe? In line 3, “a slit of the one or more slits” is indefinite. Which slit is being referred to? Is it the slit on the first lobe or the slit on the second lobe?
Regarding claim 37, “each aperture defines” is unclear and should be changed to “each of the first and second apertures define” to correct the problem. Also, in line 3, “each slot narrows from the proximal bore toward the distal bore” is unclear and should be changed to “the slot in the first lobe and the slot in the second lobe narrows from the proximal bore in the first and second lobe toward the distal bore in the first and second lobe, respectively” to correct the problem.
Regarding claim 38, “each bore” is indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to “the proximal bore and the distal bore of each of the first aperture and the second aperture” to correct the problem.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 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.
Claims 23, 25-31, and 36-38 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The prior art fail to disclose an adjustable component integratable into a buckle frame, band element or bracelet link, said adjustable component comprising: (a) a bar or pin with a first end and a second end; (b) a first lobe with a first aperture comprising a proximal bore, a distal bore and a slot extending between the proximal and distal bores configured to receive the first end of the bar or pin; (c) a second lobe with a second aperture comprising a proximal bore, a distal bore and a slot extending between the proximal and distal bores configured to receive the second end of the bar or pin opposite the first end so that the bar or pin extends perpendicularly between the first and second lobes and slides within the slots between the proximal and distal bores of the apertures of the first and second lobes to transition between a lengthened configuration and a shortened configuration; and, (d) one or more slits intersecting each of the first and second aperture such that each of the first and second lobes form cantilevered springs which elastically deflect to accommodate movement of the bar or pin within the slot of each of the first and second aperture between the proximal and distal bores of each of the first and second apertures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK W LAVINDER whose telephone number is (571)272-7119. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 9-4pm (EST).
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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
JACK W. LAVINDER
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JACK W LAVINDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights