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
Applicant is advised that, in the IDS filed 9 July 2025, the reference US 20140009686 A1 appears to be listed in error. This reference is attributed to Segal (and not Kalember et al. as listed on the IDS), and is drawn to “a teleprompter system and method”. Accordingly, the reference has not been considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
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 “connection part”, introduced in Claim 6 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 title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Specifically, the disclosure is titled “METHOD FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTING OF FIBER COMPOSITE MATERIALS”. However, the subject matter of the disclosure is entirely drawn to “a connector for moving a filler” (see Abstract), and related features and dimensions of said connector. There is no mention of “printing” or teaching of adaptive construction of the connector via composite materials within the disclosure.
Claim Objections
The preamble of Claim 5 is objected to for the following reasons. The preamble states, “The connector of any one selected from claim 1 or claim 2”. Here, Examiner requests amendment to either
- “The connector according to of any one selected from claim 1 or claim 2” or
- “The connector as in any one of of any one selected from claim 1 or claim 2”,
in order to conform to U.S. practice. Please refer to MPEP 608.01(n) for additional acceptable examples of multiple dependent claims.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
- accommodation member, introduced at Claim 1, interpreted as any flexible container capable of storing particulate matter,
- support, introduced at Claim 1, interpreted as the inner material portion of any annular-shaped device used to connect containers or facilitate the flow of fluent material,
- hollow, introduced at Claim 1, interpreted as the interior hollow portion of any annular-shaped device used to connect containers or facilitate the flow of fluent material,
- first stopping part, and second stopping part, both introduced at Claim 1, interpreted as any lip, flange, or collar of an annular-shaped device used to connect containers or facilitate the flow of fluent material,
- first bending part and second bending part, both introduced at Claim 2, interpreted as any curved component of an annular-shaped device used to connect containers or facilitate the flow of fluent material,
- binding member, introduced at Claim 8, interpreted as any article that can be used to tie or otherwise close a flexible container.
Examiner further acknowledges the presence of a “connection part”, introduced at Claim 6. However, this component is not labeled in the drawings; Examiner reserves comment on the interpretation of this component, pending resolution of the corresponding drawing objection as detailed above.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 8-9 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 8, this independent claim contains several “operation” steps (item numbers added by Examiner for clarity):
- a “first operation” establishes “a pouch-shaped accommodation member” (1)
- a “second operation” refers to “the first accommodation member” (1)
- a “third operation” and a “fourth operation” both refer to “the second accommodation member” (1)
- a “fifth operation” and a “sixth operation” both refer to “the accommodation member”.
As shown above, the claim is replete with antecedent basis issues, which renders the scope of the claim indefinite. The claim fails to establish either “a first accommodation member” or “a second accommodation member” prior to relying upon them later in the claim. Additionally, it is unclear if either of the “first” or “second” accommodation member(s) in the second and third operations are the same as “a pouch-shaped accommodation member” of the first operation, or different components. Finally, it is unclear of “the accommodation member” of the fifth and sixth operations are the same components in the first through fourth operations, or still different components.
Correction is required.
Regarding Claim 9, this independent claim suffers from the same issues as described above for Claim 8. Correction is required.
Further regarding Claims 8-9, in the interests of compact prosecution, Examiner interprets both claims as requiring first and second “accommodation members”, further interpreted as any flexible container(s) capable of storing particulate matter.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reifers (US 5597022 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Reifers discloses a connector (Claim 1 and Fig 11, item 28) for moving a filler connected to an opening formed in an accommodation member (Claim 1, flexible trash bag) to assist with movement of the filler filled in a pouch-shaped accommodation member (said trash bag is “pouch-shaped”), the connector comprising:
- a support (Fig 11, Examiner’s annotations) of which an inner circumferential surface has a band-shaped ring shape surrounding a hollow (the space formed by “open top 12” and “open bottom 13”, as described at least at Col 1, lines 55-60) formed in a central portion and both ends are open (the apparatus is described at Claim 1 as being “a loading ring”, and would therefore have this shape);
- a first stopping part (Col 5, lines 35- 40, “a peripheral flange 14 having a depending lip 15”) formed along an outer circumferential surface of the one open end of the support and constituting a rim structure by a distance by which the first stopping part is spaced apart from a central axis in directions of both ends of the hollow being larger than an outer circumferential surface of the support; and
- a second stopping part (Col 5, lines 41-46, “a flange 29, with an optional lip 31”) formed along an outer circumferential surface of the other open end of the support (“adjacent opening 13”), constituting a rim structure by a distance by which the second stopping part is spaced apart from the central axis in the directions of both ends of the hollow being larger than the outer circumferential surface of the support, and having a shape symmetrical to the first stopping part,
wherein
a minimum distance by which protruding rim ends of the first stopping part and the second stopping part are spaced apart from the central axis in the directions of both ends of the hollow (shown at Fig 11)
is greater than
a distance by which both open ends of the first stopping part and the second stopping part are spaced apart from each other along the central axis in the directions of both ends of the hollow (also shown at Fig 11).
PNG
media_image1.png
476
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Examiner reserves comment on the allowability of Claim 6 pending resolution of the drawing objection as detailed above.
Claims 8-9 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 8534224 B2, US 6425424 B1, US 4307990 A, US 20190210756 A1, US 1668825 A each teach structures similar to the features of the independent claims. However, none of the references disclose the method of Claims 8-9, nor feature the additional subject matter of Applicant’s current dependent claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M AFFUL whose telephone number is (571)272-8421. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 5712723607. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M AFFUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights