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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/17/2025 and 04/14/2026 was considered by the examiner.
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 1-18 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 recites the limitation "the internal sealing body lower surface" in line 30. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the internal sealing body top surface" in line 31. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the distance between the base body first side and the body second side" in line 46. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the flat spring top surface" in line 48-49. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 depends on claim 13 which is improper as “The method” of claim 16 lacks an antecedent basis because a method is not referred to prior to claim 16 neither in claim 13.
Claim 17 depends on claim 13 which is improper as “The method” of claim 17 lacks an antecedent basis because a method is not referred to prior to claim 16 neither in claim 13.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 15 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.
Claim 2-14 and 16-18 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 closest prior art of record US5088256 to Face, US4030852 to Hein, and US3687022 to Brown all disclose a sealing device for sealing a void bur all fails to teach or adequately suggest the combination of characteristics specified in the independent claim, especially the requirement of a substance concerning a water-resistant flat spring, the flat spring body having a flat spring body first section adjacent a flat spring body second section, the flat spring body second section adjacent a flat spring body third section, the flat spring body third section adjacent a flat spring body fourth section, and the flat spring body fourth section adjacent a flat spring fifth section, the flat spring body having a flat spring body top surface and a flat spring body bottom surface opposite the flat spring body top surface, the flat spring body bowed away from the base body at the flat spring body third section, the flat spring body first section extending downward away from the flat spring body third section and adjacent the base body lower section, the flat spring top surface at the flat spring first section aligned with the base body lower section first side, the flat spring body fifth section extending downward away from the flat spring body third section and adjacent the base body lower section, the flat spring top surface at the flat spring fifth section aligned with the base body lower section second side, that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attached NOTICE OF REFERENCE CITED.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABAJIDE A DEMUREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-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, Brian Glessner can be reached at 5712726754. 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.
BABAJIDE A. DEMUREN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/BABAJIDE A DEMUREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights