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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itabashi (US Pat. Pub. No. US 2017/0184998 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Itabashi discloses a method for attaching a first holder 71 holding an electrical contact surface 611 to a second holder 72 supported by a cartridge housing 10 (Figs. 2 and 6), the method comprising: moving the first holder 71 in a first direction (Fig. 6, the third direction) toward the second holder 72 to which a coil spring 73 is attached, the first direction crossing the electrical contact surface 611; and engaging a pawl 714b of the first holder 71 with the second holder 72 (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 23, Itabashi discloses wherein: the pawl 714b includes a first pawl 714b and a second pawl 714b, and the engaging includes engaging the first pawl 714b with the second holder 72 and engaging the second pawl 714b with the second holder 72 (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 24, Itabashi discloses wherein the moving includes inserting the first pawl 714n and the second pawl 714b into the second holder 72 (Figs. 4 and 6).
Regarding claim 25, Itabashi discloses wherein the first pawl includes: a first arm extending in the first direction (the third direction in Fig. 6); and a first hook 714b protruding from a tip end portion of the first arm in a second direction crossing the first direction, the first hook 714b being engageable with the second holder 72 (Figs. 4 and 6), wherein the second pawl 714b includes: a second arm extending in the first direction (the third direction in Fig. 6); and a second hook 714b protruding from a tip end portion of the second arm in the second direction, the second hook 714b being engageable with the second holder 72 (Figs. 4 and 6), wherein the inserting includes deforming the first arm and the second arm in the second direction, and wherein the engaging includes engaging the first hook 714b with the second holder 72 by restoration of a shape of the first arm, and engaging the second hook 714b with the second holder 72 by restoration of a shape of the second arm (Fig. 6).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 15-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following reasons:
Claim 15 of current patent application is broader than claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2 by not disclosing “a corner part of” (column 16, lines 54-55) and “in the first direction” (column 16, line 62).
Claim 16 of current patent application is broader than claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2 by not disclosing “from the first corner part of” (column 17, lines 4-5) and “from the second corner part of” (column 17, lines 8-9).
Claim 17 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2.
Claim 18 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2 (The first corner part and the second corner part are parts of the second holder.)
Claim 19 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2.
Claim 20 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2. (The first corner part and the second corner part are parts of the second holder.)
Claim 21 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2.
Claims 15-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,339,614 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following reasons:
Claim 15 of current patent application is broader than claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2 by not disclosing “and the cartridge housing” (column 16, line 58).
Claim 16 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2.
Claim 17 of current patent application is equivalent to claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2.
Claims 18-21 of current patent application are equivalent to claims 3-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,045,003 B2, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-30 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA S CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/SOPHIA S CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Ssc
July 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights