DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Notes
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(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 1-17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular a multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the multifunctional building envelope part” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the multifunctional building enclosure part”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the roof covering” in line 3, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the surroundings” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “surroundings”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the interior” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “an interior”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the building” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a building”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the water-repellent sealing” in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a water-repellent sealing”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular a roof skin enveloping the building on the roof side” in lines 7-8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the roof skin” in lines 8-9, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 10, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the direction” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a direction”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the roof skin” in line 12, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 13, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the direction” in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a direction”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the direction” in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a direction”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular roof ridge-side attachment unit end” in lines 19-20, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular a solar roof tile” in lines 21-22, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 22-23, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the at least one solar roof tile” in line 23. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the solar roof tile”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular solar roof tiles” in line 24, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular roof tiles” in line 25, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the building envelope part” in lines 25-26. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the multifunctional building enclosure part”. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the roof covering” in line 26, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular a tile plane” in lines 26-27, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 27-28, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. All claims which depend on clam 1 are rejected by virtue of dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the term “in particular the roof ridge-side end” in lines 4-5, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the term “in particular a solar roof tile inner side” in lines 5-6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the term “in particular a roof eaves-side attachment unit end” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites the term “in particular roof ridge-side” in lines 3-4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites the term “in particular roof-eaves side” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the term “in particular roof eaves-side attachment end” in lines 6-7, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 4-5, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the term “in particular of the at least one solar roof tile” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in line 7, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites the term “preferably both connecting section” in line 3, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites the term “preferably connecting sections spacing the inner leg apart from the outer leg” in lines 3-4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites the term “preferably the outer legs” in line 5, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the term “preferably roof eaves-side attachment unit end” in lines 5-6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites the term “preferably solar roof tiles” in line 4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “the solar element/solar roof tile” in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the at least one solar element or the solar roof tile”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “the solar element/solar roof tile” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the at least one solar element or the solar roof tile”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “a/the solar element/solar roof tile” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the at least one solar element or the solar roof tile”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “a/the top-side solar element end or roof ridge-side solar roof tile end” in lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the top-side solar element end or the roof ridge-side solar roof tile end”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites “a/the solar element/solar roof tile” in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “the at least one solar element or the solar roof tile”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites “a/the underside solar element end” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “an underside solar element end”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites the term “in particular the roof eaves-side solar roof tile end” in lines 4-5, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “in particular the multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “in particular solar roof tiles” in lines 4-5, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites “a/the underside solar element end” in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “an underside solar element end”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “in particular a roof eaves-side solar roof tile end” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites “a/the solar element outer side” in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the recitation will be treated as if it recites “a solar element outer side”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “in particular a roof tile outer side” in lines 7-8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in line 8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular for covering a roof of a building” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in line 2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular according to claim 1” in line 4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular the roof covering” in lines 6-7, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “preferably sheet-like like” in line 8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular a roof skin enveloping the building on the roof side” in lines 9-10, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 12, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “preferably sheet-like like” in line 15, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular roof ridge-side attachment unit end” in line 20, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular covering the roof with the least one solar roof tile” in lines 21-22, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in line 23, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 25-26, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular solar roof tiles” in line 27, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular roof tiles” in line 28, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular the roof covering” in line 29, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular a tile plane” in line 30, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “in particular a tile plane” in line 30, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “preferably a solar roof tile” in line 2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “in particular solar roof tiles” in line 3, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “preferably solar roof tile” in line 4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “preferably in that the top-side solar element end” in lines 5-6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “in particular the roof ridge-side solar roof tile end” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “preferably solar roof tile” in lines 7-8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “in particular a roof eaves-side solar roof tile end” in lines 9-10, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 12, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “in particular for providing an under-roof construction or facade substructure” in lines 3-4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “in particular for providing a multifunctional building enclosure part or a multifunctional roof covering according to claim 1” in lines 4-6, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 8, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “in particular a roof skin enveloping the building on the roof side” in lines 9-10, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 12, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 15, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “preferably sheet-like” in line 15, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in line 21, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in lines 22-23, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular a multifunctional roof covering” in lines 1-2, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular the roof covering or facade cladding” in line 4, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular a roof skin enveloping the building on the roof side, or a lateral outer skin of the building” in lines 7-9, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular roof-ridge side” in lines 11-12, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in lines 13-14, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 14-15, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular solar roof tiles” in line 16, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular roof tiles” in line 17, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular the roof covering or facade cladding” in line 18, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 19-20, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular the at least one solar roof tile” in line 23, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in line 24, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular of the at least one solar roof tile” in lines 25-26, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular solar roof tile” in lines 26-27, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the term “in particular roof skin or a lateral outer skin of the building” in line 28, which has been held to be indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear. It is not clear whether the claimed narrower range is a limitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAE-SIK KANG whose telephone number is 571-272-3190. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am – 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew T. Martin can be reached on 571-270-7871. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAE-SIK KANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights