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 are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 3; the robase plate.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 18, & 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims have multiple sections that begin with a capital letter despite being mid-sentence and recite several elements without a proper article or with an improper article. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10, recites, “plate3”. Its unknown if that is a typo or intentional.
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 1-20 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Specifically:
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the centre" in lines 12 & 13 of the claim respectively. Claims 18 & 20 also recite such limitations. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. Claims 2-17 & 19 fail to remedy such deficiencies.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "said slot" in line 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. Claims 3, 7, & 13-16 fail to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 3 recites the limitations "said support column," “the bottom surface,” “the top surface” “the middle of said middle connector” and “the other end of the support column” in lines 2, 4, 4-5, 5-6, & 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Claim 4 recites the limitations "the centre of the top support bar" “the entire length of the support bar,” and “both sides of the top support bar” in lines 3, 3, & 4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. Claims 6, 8-9, & 17 fail to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 5 recites the limitations "the centre of the top support bar" “the entire legth of top support bar,” and “both sides of bottom support bar” in lines 3, 3-4, & 4-5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. Claims 10-12 fail to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the slot of the bottom support bar" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 fails to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "both sides of the first side panel" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 13 & 15-16 fail to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the ends of the first bulge of the top connector" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitations "the ends of said top connecting rod," “both sides” of said first clamping arm, “the side walls” of said top support bar, and “said first channel on said top support bar,” in lines 3, 4, 4, & 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitations "both sides" of the second clamping arm, “said bottom support bar having… sidewalls thereof” and “said second channel” in lines 5, 6, & 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. Claim 11 fails to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the middle connector" and “the central support bar” in lines 1 & 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Claim 14 recites the limitations "the slot of the top support bar," “(both) sides of the first activity plate and second activity plate” and “the slot of the lateral support bar” in lines 5-6, 7, 9, & 10 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “armrests” in claim 14 is used by the claim to mean “handle,” while the accepted meaning is “an arm rest.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "said airflow orifice" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitations "said first through hole" “said lockset,” “said second through hole” “the central position” “the locked state,” and “the free state” in lines 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, & 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "a free state" which is a limitation that was previously recited two lines prior. This creates a clarity issue; is the same feature or discrete of that similar feature recited earlier in the claim(s).
Claim 18 further recites the limitations “said socket” "the first bottom projection of the first attachment block," "the size of said socket" “the bottom of the first attachment block” “the top surface of the upper bulge” “the upper bulge” “the entire height direction of the first attachment block,” “the threaded holes of the first attachment block” “the cages” “the horizontal connection,” and "the two cages" in lines 16, 16-17, 20, 23, 23-24, 24, 24-25, 27-28, 33, 35-36 & 36. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Claim 20 also recites such limitations. Claim 19 fails to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "a first connection hole" which is a limitation that was previously recited 12 lines prior in line 26 of the claim. This creates a clarity issue; is the same feature or discrete of that similar feature recited earlier in the claim(s). Claim 20 also recites such limitations. Claim 19 fails to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "connect the bottom connector to the bottom connector" in line 27 of the claim. Which renders the claim indefinite because, it is not clear if the bottom connector is a system that requires assembly or if a plurality of bottom correctors are being attached together. The meets and bounds of the limitation cannot be determined, as such the claim has been rendered indefinite. Claim 20 also recites such limitations. Claim 19 fails to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 20 further recites the limitations "said fourth lateral support bar," “the centre of said fourth lateral support bar,” “the entire length of said fourth lateral support bar,” “said top connector connection;” "said fifth lateral support bar," “the centre of said fifth lateral support bar,” “the length of said fifth lateral support bar,” “the lower stacked cages,” in lines 39, 40, 40-41, 43-44, 45, 47, 47-48, & 55. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0223283 A1 which discloses a pet barrier and/or enclosure with a first and second attachment block. U.S. Patent No. 5,839,248 A which discloses a modular frame assembly with a plurality of attachment blocks with a plurality of bulges of a certain height in a certain direction. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0314220 A1 which discloses a modular fence panel system with a plurality of attachment blocks and lateral support bars. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0208607 A1 which discloses a modular cage with an attachment block assembly. U.S. Patent No. 3,836,217 A which discloses a box-shaped piece of furniture featuring an attachment block assembly and a plurality of support bars. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0236510 A1 which discloses a modular enclosure system featuring an attachment block assembly, side panels, and support bars. U.S. Patent No. 4,901,672 A which discloses an animal enclosure that utilities attachment blocks, plugs, and panels. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0112772 A1 which discloses a modular pet cage. U.S. Patent No. 6,763,784 B1 which discloses a modular cage with an attachment block assembly. U.S. Patent No. 6,832,580 B2 which discloses a modular cage with an attachment block assembly. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0157456 A1 which discloses a modular and stackable kennel with an attachment block assembly. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0408233 A1 which discloses a T-shaped attachment block. U.S. Patent No. 4,865,213 A which discloses a composite panel and an attachment block assembly for connecting elements/panels together. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0020102 A1 which discloses a support for a vertical panel. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0144327 A1 which discloses an attachment block assembly for modular cages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE P MACCRATE whose telephone number is (571)272-5215. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9am-5pm 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, Joshua J Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
/NICOLE PAIGE MACCRATE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
