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.
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 11 and 13-21 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.
Claims 13 and 14 recites “0 >= N4 > N5 > N6 >= 100”. This equation is mathematically impossible.
Claims 18 and 19 recite the term “complementary printmask”. This limitation is not defined with an objective standard. The specification [Para. 0020] uses the term without specifying what mathematical/structural relationship makes a printmask “complementary”. Therefore, the metes and bounds are unclear. In addition, the phrase “is additional used” is also grammatically unclear.
Claims 11 recites the limitation "the part" in lines 10, 15, 17-18 and 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the part" in lines 6, 8 and 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the part" in lines 5-6, 8, and 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the droplet generator" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the droplet generator" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the other manifold" in 4-5 and 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the other plurality of nozzles" in lines 6, 8-9 and 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the part" in lines 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the other manifold" in lines 4-5 and 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the other plurality of nozzles" in lines 6 and 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the part" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the jetting viscosity" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the jetting temperature" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "jetting viscosity" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the jetting temperature" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims 12-25 inherit the profile of independent claim 1 and therefore are also rejected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-25 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACEY M MCMILLION whose telephone number is (571)270-5193. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-2:30PM 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, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached at 571-272-5960. 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.
/TRACEY M MCMILLION/Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/RICARDO I MAGALLANES/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
